1920-03-22

[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 23, to incorporate Canadian. American Fire Insurance Company.-Mr. Griesbach.	-
Bill No. 24, to incorporate The Pabos, Amqui and Edmundston Railway Company. -,Mr. Pelletier.
Bill No. 25, respecting The Pacific Coast Fire Insurance Company. -Mr. Stevens.
Bill No. 26, respecting The Pacific Marine Insurance Company.-Mr. Steveps.

[Stage Direction]
A message from His Excellency the Administrator of the Government, transmitting estimates for the year ending March 31,. 1921, -was presented by Sir Henry Drayton (Minister of Finance), read by Mr. Speaker to the House, and referred to the Committee of Supply.	,

[Stage Direction]
Annual report of the Royal Northwest Mounted Police for the year ended Septem^-ber 30, 1919.-Hon. Mr. Rowell.
[Stage Direction]
Copy of all correspondence -and agreements between the Government and any banks touching any payments to officers and men of the Canadian Expeditionary Force.-Rt. Hon. Mr. Sifton.
Cancellations of Orders in Council authorizing the payment of Separation Allowances.-Hon. Mr. Rallantyne.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. NEWTON W. ROWELL (Minister of Health) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 27, respecting Food and Drugs. [DOT]
An lion. MEMBER: Explain.
Mr. ROWELL:: This is a revision and consolidation of the present Act relating to the adulteration of food and of the various amending Acts of the past ten years. One of the principal differences between the present Bill and the Acts already on the statute book is the distinction now sought to be drawn between the adulteration of food and misbranding which is not very clear in the present Act, the new Bill excludes fertilizers and cattle feeds. At present we have an Act respecting commercial feedings stuffs which deals with cattle feeds, but we also have certain provisions in the Adulteration Act relating to the same matter. These are eliminated from the Food and Drugs Bill and will be included in the new Commercial Feeding Stuffs Bill. The present Act contains certain special provisions relating to honey and maple syrup which gives a monopoly in the use of these words; these are eliminated from the present Bill and will be dealt with separately. This Bill also includes quite a number of changes in detail, the result of the experience gained in the administration of the law during the last twenty yeaTS. These will be explained when the Bill is in committee.
Motion agreed to and Bill read the first time.



MAPLE PRODUCTS ADULTERATION.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. Mr. ROWELL (Minister of Health) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 28, respecting Maple Products.
An hon. MEMBER:: Explain.


Newton Wesley Rowell: It is simply the re-enactment in a separate Bill of the clauses relating to maple products which are eliminated from the present Adulteration Act not being properly germane to such an Act.
Motion agreed to and Bill read the first time.
[The Speaker.]



HONEY ADULTERATION.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. Mr. ROWELL (Minister of Health) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 29, respecting honey.
He said: This is simply the re-enactment of clauses relating to this matter which have been eliminated from the present Adulteration Act.
Motion agreed to and Bill read the first time.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day.
Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Leader of the Opposition):: Before the Orders of the Day are called, Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Rt. Hon. the leader of the Government whether the Government contemplates bringing down any legislation respecting the franchise, other than that which is contained in the Bill before the House at the present time, and in particular whether the Government contemplates introducing either at this or at any subse1 quent session a Disfranchising Act.


Sir GEORGE FOSTER:: I am not prepared to say at the moment what may be added to the Bill that has been brought down.	.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Do I understand my right hon. friend to say that the Government is not contemplating any disfranchising Act?


George Green Foster: I	am saying that at the present time we are not contemplating any. But I have not any right to pledge the Government that they will not introduce any additions to the present Franchise Bill.



CREDIT TO THE BELGIAN GOVERNMENT-THE P. BURNS COMPANY.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day.
Mr. WILLIAM D. EULER (Waterloo North): Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Government a question based on an article sent from Ottawa and published in the Toronto Globe on Saturday which states:
Mr. P. Burns of Calgary is in Ottawa to see if a ten-million-dollar credit can be established for the Belgian Government, which desires to get that quantity of meat from him. On account of the situation in the West last year, as regards feed and grazing, many animals were sold by their owners, and the P. Burns Company has an exceptionally large stock of meat, the surplus of which Mr. Burns desires to export. As the Belgian Government is in a

better position than most of the European countries, there is a possibility that an exception may' be made in this case to the decision of the Government that it is better to withdraw from the credit business as soon as possible.
I should like to ask whether any such application has been received from the Burns Company and whether the 'Government is considering the granting of such application.
Sir HENRY DRAYTON (.Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, proposals have been made-I do not know whether they are proposals of the P. Burns Company, as a company, or of the Belgian Government -but proposals have been made which look towards assistance from the Canadian Government in the marketing of cattle. The matter has not been advanced in any degree at all one way or the other; the proposal not having yet gone far enough to determine exactly what it is.



FISCAL POLICY OF THE GOVERNMENT.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day.
Mr. MICHAEL CLARK (Red Deer):: I should like to ask my hon. friend the Minister of Finance (Sir Henry Drayton) a question based on a report appearing in the morning papers. My hon. friend the Minister of Marine (Mr. Ballantyne) is alleged to have stated that the fiscal policy of the Government will be brought down on the first of May-information which would usually be conveyed across the floor.
I should like to ask the Minister of Finance whether my hon. friend the Minister of Marine gave the people of Montreal accurate information?


Hon. Mr. BALLANTYNE (Minister of Marine):: Probably it will be agreeable to' the hon. member for Red Deer if I reply to his question. What appeared briefly in one of the Ottawa papers, and more fully in the Montreal Gazette, reports correctly a speech that I made, with this slight difference- not only slight, but it is also an important difference-I was speaking about the new general policy of the Government that the Prime Minister will bring down when he returns to his place in the House; but I did not refer to any new fiscal policy, although I had something to say on fiscal policy.


Michael Clark: Perhaps it is the old fiscal policy.



ROYAL CANADIAN NA VY-REPORTED DEMOBILIZATION.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE. KING (Leader of the Opposition): The papers make mention of despatches from Esquimalt and Halifax indicating that the Minister of the Naval Service (Hon. Mr. Ballantyne) has issued orders having in view the demobilization of the Naval Forces of Canada. Has the minister any statement to make to the House on the subject? Have any orders been issued, and if so, what was the nature of them?
Hon. Mr. BALLANTYNE |(Minister of Naval Affairs):	The article that appeared
in the press this ^norning was wholly unauthorized. I will make a full statement to the House on Thursday next.


[Stage Direction]
The House in Committee on Bill No. 9, *to incorporate Scottish Canadian Assurance Corporation-Mr. Mowat-Mr. Boivin in the Chair.
On section 3-Capital stock:
Mr. McKENZIE:: The business of insurance is a very important one and the rights of policyholders should be safeguarded in every possible way. Insurance companies operating in Canada have been known to fail and to be unable to meet the claims made under policies which they had issued. I hope the Minister of Finance ('Sir Henry Drayton) will see that any companies empowered to carry on the business of insurance in Canada are sufficiently strong, and that those who take out policies with them are sufficiently protected.


Henry Lumley Drayton: All the provisions of the law relating to these companies will be strictly enforced. Under those provisions security has to be placed .in the hands of the department before license to carry on business is issued, and .after those securities are so deposited the companies are subjected to strict inspection.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 4-amount to be subscribed:
Mr. CAHILL:: What proportion of the
subscription must be paid in cash before the company may start business?


Henry Lumley Drayton: I am not in
charge of the Bill, but if the hon. member will look at paragraph 7 he will see a provision that the company shall not commence the business of fire insurance until not less than $250,000 of the capital stock has been bona fide subscribed and not less than $100,000 paid thereon. There are other provisions setting1 forth the amount that has to be paid up before the business is undertaken.


Frank S. Cahill: That $250,000 is the
amount which must be subscribed before the business of fire insurance may be undertaken. What is the proportion applicable to the carrying on of other kinds of insurance?


Henry Lumley Drayton: Section 7 goes on to provide the amounts- for the other classes of business: accident insurance, $40,000; sickness insurance, $10,000; automobile insurance, $20,000; burglary insurance, $20,000; hail insurance, $50,000.


Frank S. Cahill: Then, what is the purpose of clause 4 providing that not less than $200,000 must be subscribed? What business can be undertaken by the company when that amount is subscribed, and what proportion of that amount must be paid in cash before any business can be undertaken?


Henry Lumley Drayton: Looking offhand at the section as drawn, I would say that apparently the fire insurance business is looked upon as the main business of the company, and that that business is not to be entered upon until $250,000 has been actually subscribed. Of course, it might be that the company would commence to carry on these other classes of insurance, and to provide for that the exact amounts of capital to be paid up in each case are specifically set out. The amount of $200,000 would be sufficient to cover any of these classes of insurance, excluding fire insurance.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 7-Commencing business:
Mr. BUREAU:: Read the section, Mr. Chairman.


The CHAIRMAN:: This is a Private Bill which has already bean considered by a Committee. Is it the desire of this Committee that the clause 'be read?


Jacques Bureau: Is it not the privilege of a member to ask the Chairman to read a clause of a Bill?


Georges Henri Boivin: It is not the privilege of an hon. member. This can only be demanded by the Committee. The Chairman calls the number of each clause and reads the marginal note. He should read the clause at length only when it is demanded by the Committee. Bourinot at page 522 is very clear upon this point, and many such rulings have been given. Having stated the rule, the Chairman has no objection to read the clause if the hon. member insists.


Jacques Bureau: I do insist, and I say
th'at the privileges of members ought to be extended if they have not the right to ask that a clause in a Bill under consideration in Committee of the Whole be read by the Chairman, simply because the Bill has already been considered by another committee. If that is the case, it is high time the rules of the House were amended.


Georges Henri Boivin: The Chairman has no objection.
The Chairman thereupon read section 7 of the Bill.


Jacques Bureau: Do I understand that the basis of the business to be carried on under clause 6 is fire insurance? The company must raise so much money to be able to carry on fire insurance, and the fire insurance business must amount to so much before they can carry on sickness, burglary, automobile or other insurance; but the basic foundation is fire insurance.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think so.
When I was asked a question by the hon. gentleman who first drew my attention to it, I think, perhaps, he did not read section 4 aright and I had not read it. Section 4, the hon. gentleman will see. refers to the amount of capital stock to be subscribed before the general meeting for the election of the directors is called. That is the initial step in the formation of the company. That general meeting having been called and the stock having been subscribed, before the company commences to carry on the business of fire insurance, capital stock to the extent of $250,000 has to be subscribed and not less than $100,000 must be paid in cash thereon. That having been done, that being the first step, as the hon. member very properly points out, these other activities will be carried on provided that the financial status of the company is increased.in the manner indicated in thiA clause.	,

Mr. BUREA'U: The capital wdth the surplus?


Henry Lumley Drayton: The available
assets of the company, its strength.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Bill reported.

[Stage Direction]
The House in committee on Bill No. 10, respecting the Trust and Loan Company of Canada.
On section 1-short title.
Jacques Bureau: Has the Bill been before the Committee on Banking and Commerce?


Mr. SHEARD:: Yes.


Jacques Bureau: Then we might get a [DOT]
synopsis of it from the chairman of that committee, so that we may see what changes, if any, have been made.


Henry Lumley Drayton: The hon. mem-mer for London is in charge of the Bill and is, I think, familiar with it.


Mr. CRONYN:: 
Jacques Bureau: He has a larger liability.


Hume Cronyn: 
Jacques Bureau: I never looked at the
charter of. the Trust and Loan Company. Did I understand my hon. friend to say that when the reserve fund is equal to or exceeds the amount of the paid up stock, this same reserve fund may be distributed amongst the stockholders?


Hume Cronyn: No. Perhaps I expressed myself wrongly. Until the leserve fund reached 100 per cent of the paid up capital or, as the hon. member puts it, equals the paid up capital, the company must set aside one-half of its profits over 6 per cent, towards building up the reserve fund. Once the reserve fund is built up, the company can distribute its entire profits amongst the shareholders.


Jacques Bureau: The reserve remains? .


Hume Cronyn: Yes in the form of paid up capital.


Frank S. Cahill: I understand that instead of distributing in dividends a portion of the

surplus which may have been earned in the last two or three years, the Bill purposes distributing paid up stock. In what way does that affect the income tax of Canada?


Henry Lumley Drayton: I am afraid
it does not affect the income tax much, one way or the other. In Canada we tax Canadian incomes; we tax the incomes of those people who are ordinarily resident in Canada or who carry on business in Canada.
I think that practically all the shareholders in this company are people who reside in the Mother Country, and as such are not taxable.


Frank S. Cahill: That is, the business being carried on is taxable only so far as the people who own the funds are resident in Canada.
iSir HENRY DRAYTON: Their personal taxes will not be changed at all one way or the other. As to whether this company is liable for any excess business, profits' tax, I am not in a position to inform the hon. member, because that has not been looked into.


Frank S. Cahill: If the company were liable under the Excess Business Profits' Tax Act, would the fact of the company distributing paid-up stock instead of distributing the earnings in cash, affect the Government's power to collect the excess business profits' tax.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I don't think it would affect it at all. The transfer of reserve to capital stock would not affect the amount of capital upon which the business tax would be computed.


Frank S. Cahill: No matter how the profits were distributed?


Henry Lumley Drayton: No. Otherwise the hon. gentleman will see that the profits could easily be dissipated and the tax evaded?	.


Mr. MORPHY:: Has this matter been before the shareholders, and if so, have they unanimously assented to the legislation? Secondly, if this becomes law, will any of the poorer classes of shareholders suffer by being what is commonly called " frozen out."
Mr. CRO'NYN:	There were meetings
called of the shareholders and debenture holders, which were very largely attended. There is an affidavit on file which was produced before the Banking and Commerce Committee proving that the necessary resolutions confirming what this Bill seeks to 
carry out, were unanimously agreed to -without any objection, so I am informed.


Mr. GOULD:: With respect to the Income tax, I understand that the Imperial Government requires all residents in this country who are in receipt of revenue from the Old Country, to make a return'. Could not this legislation be made retroactive, empowering the Government to demand a return from residents of other countries who are recipients of funds from Canada?


Henry Lumley Drayton: That whole question is under consideration. We are not satisfied with the present position. Whether we shall be aible to remedy it or not is another question.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Bill reported.

[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 7, to incorporate The T. Eaton General Insurance Company.-iMr. Mowat.

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk).

Mr. COPP:: 1.	Is Mr. George Carvill in the employ of the Canadian National Railways?
2.	If not, was he dismissed from the service?
3.	If dismissed, what was the cause and date of such dismissal and who ordered same?
4.	Did said Mr. Carvill ask for an investigation into the cause of his dismissal?
5.	If so, was such request granted? If not, why?


Hon. Mr. REID:: 1.	No.
2.	Yes.
3.	Mr. Carvill was dismissed April 30, 1917, for general incompetency by the management.
4.	Yes.
5.	Request for investigation was received. The management investigated the case and from evidence submitted it was not considered necessary to re-open it.


TRENT CANAL WHARVES.
Mr. BURNHAM:: What will the Government do regarding the superintendence and upkeep of the Trent canal wharves between lock seven and Rice lake, in view of the statement by the then Minister of Railways and Canals recorded on page 759 of Hansard, Vol.'l, 1917?


Hon. Mr. REID:: 
COST OP GENERAL ELECTIONS.
*Mr. CASGRAIN:: What was the total cost of the general election of 1896, and of each general election subsequently held in the Dominion of Canada?


Henry Lumley Drayton: 1896, $197,103.35; 1900,	$232,911.20;	1904,	$307,995.60; 1908,
$391,960.32; 1911, $507,353.55; 1917, $1,678,139.99. The latter amount includes expenses of taking the soldiers' vote and the cost of enumeration of voters' lists.


STEAMER A. J. McKEE.
Mr. SINCLAIR (Antigonish and Guys-borough):: 1.	On what date was the steamer A. J. McKee purchased by the Government?
2.	From whom was the steamer purchased, and at what price?
3.	What is her net and D.W. tonnage?
4.	How much has been expended on repairs and refitting of this vessel since the date of her purchase?
5.	What trade is she engaged in at present?
6.	What is her net earnings from the date of purchase up to the date of last voyage in which the accounts have been adjusted?


Hon. Mr. REID:: 1.	April 18, 1917.
2.	Purchased from Algoma Steel Corporation. Purchase price, $500,000.
3.	Net, 1,373 tons; dead weight, 3,000 tons (approx.)
4.	$342,660.
5.	St. John-West Indies.
6.	There has been a deficit of $269,354 to 31st December, 1919, on account of serious damage sustained through the Halifax explosion, and also on account of vessel running aground at New York. The vessel being uninsured at that time, repairs were largely charged to operating expenses.


GASPE STEAMSHIP SERVICE.
Mr. MARCIL (Bonaventure) :: 1.	Has the Government given any thought to putting in some of its own steamers on the Montreal-Quebec-Gaspfi route and on the Camp-bellton-Gaspd route in lieu of the steamers subsidized in the past?
2.	Is the Government aware that the residents of Matane, Gaspd and Bonaventure counties have to rely on sailing craft to transact their business as in the old days?


George Green Foster: -
1.	No.	.
2.	The Government has no special information. There may be some cases of the kind.


MATAPEDIA FREIGHT TRAFFIC.
Mr. MAROIL (Bonaventure):: What has been the amount of freight business done at the railway station of Matapedia, Quebec, in dollars and tons during the last five years as compared with the previous five year period?


John Dowsley Reid: For the five year period ending December 31, 1914, the freight business was as [DOT]follows:
Outward freight	 119,990	tons
Earnings	 $274,294.04
Inward freight	119,319	tons
Earnings	 $334,570.67
For the five year period ending December 31, 1919, the freight business was as follows:
Outward freight	 392,939	tons
Earnings	  $951,022.61
Inward freight	 365,600 tons
Earnings	 $1,030,916.36


BONAVENTURE AND GASPE COUNTIES DAIRY AND FISH SHIPMENTS.
Mr. MARCIL (Bonaventure):: 1.	Are any arrangements contemplated Cor the coming season to assist in the shipping of fresh fish, butter and cheese in cold storage cars from the counties of Bonaventure and GaspS?
2.	If so, what are they?


Hon. Mr. TOLMIE:: 1.	and 2.-The Dairy and Cold Storage Branch of the Department of Agriculture has arranged for several years for a weekly iced butter car service to operate over the Qubec Oriental Railway from Bonaventure to Matapedia, where it is transferred to the Canadian National Railway. It is intended to continue this service during the season of 1920.
The Department of Agriculture has never arranged for iced cars for the shipping of fresh fish and does not know of any proposal that it should be done this year.


PUBLIC WORKS EMPLOYEES.
Mr. MACK IE (Edmonton):: 1.	Could any of the employees in the Architectural and Engineering Branches of the Public Works Department be dispensed with?
2.	If so, how many?
3.	Could the services of any of the said employees have been dispensed with some time ago without hampering the work of said branches?

4.	If so, from what date?
5.	What is the annual cost of keeping said employees in the service?


John Dowsley Reid: '
1.	Yes.	.
2.	The number of employees who could be dispensed with depends entirely on the amount of work which the Department, of Public Works is authorized to car-y out during the year 1920, and this again is directly related to the extent of the appropriations granted to (he department at this session of Parliament, as the volume of work varies from year to year.
3.	Yes. .
4.	From the beginning of the year 1917.
5.	Answered by No. 2.


MILITARY HOSPITAL, ST. ANNE, QUEBEC.
Mr. TOBIN:: 1.	Has the Government a large soldiers' hospital at St. Anne, Quebec?
2.	If so, how much land in connection with said hospital cost and what has been the cost of erecting the buildings and equipment?
3.	Does the Government own the land upon which the said hospital is erected?
4.	If not, for how long has the land been leased and on what terms?
5.	In what condition has the land to be returned to its owners?


Hon. Mr. REID:: 1.	Yes.
2.	-Cost of buildings and equipment to 31st December, 1919, is $1,581,652.40.
3.	4 and 5. The hospital buildings are erected on land leased by the Royal Institution for the Advancement of Learning (Macdonald College), for a period of two years after the war, not to exceed seven
v years in all. At the expiration of that dime, the owners have the right to acquire the buildings and equipment, or portions thereof, at a valuation to be agreed upon, otherwise the buildings are to be removed by the Government and the site restored to its original condition.


CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAY.
*Mr. SEXSMITH:: 1.	Is it the intention of the Government to operate the Canadian National railways on standard time during the next summer?
2.	If so, will they compel the private owned railways to use the same time?
Hon. -Mr. REID:
1.	It has not yet been decided whether or not the Canadian National railways will operate under standard time this summer.
2.	All railways will of necessity use the same time.


REDEMPTION OF DOMINION NOTES.
*Mr. TOBIN:: 1.	Are Dominion notes redeemable in gold?
2.	If not, in virtue of what law can the Government refuse to carry out the obligation w'hieh it assumed when the notes were issued?
3.	When will the Government be in a position to pay gold for the notes which are tendered for redemption?


Henry Lumley Drayton: 1 and 2. Under the Finance Act the redemption of Dominion notes in gold has been suspended.
3.	Dominion notes are issued under statutory authority which requires a certain percentage of gold to be held as security. The gold held has been at all times considerably in excess of the required amount. The redemption of Dominion notes in gold will be resumed at the first practical opportunity, due regard being had to the interests of the country.


CAMPBELLTON-GASPE STEAMER SERVICE.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. Marcil (Bonaventure):
Owing to the refusal of the Government to grant a subsidy for a steamship service between Campbellton} N.B., and GaspA Quebec, is the Government prepared to offer a subsidy of $3,000 for a steamship service between Dal-/ housie, N.B., St. Omer and Carleton, Quebec?
.. Rt, Hon. Sir GEORGE FOSTER: The answer is in the negative.

Mr. CASGRAIN:: 1.	What amount has been collected each year by the Customs Department through its offices in the County of Charlevoix-Mont-morency, within the last five years?
2.	What was the amount collected through the same offices for the five years immediately preceding the war?


Hon. Mr. BURRELL:: 1.	1914-15,	$1,595.24;	1915-16,	$2,392.44;
1916-17, $1,947.89; 1917-18, $4,956.24; 1918-19, $5,419.24.
2.	1909-10, $814.83; 1910-11, $1,001.72; 191112,	$2,027.56;	1912-13,	$1,876.24;	1913-14,


RESIGNATION OP MR. R. A. PRINGLE, K.C.
*Mr. CASGRAIN:: 1.	Why has Mr. R. A. Pringle, K.C., resigned as Commissioner and Paper Controller?
2.	'Why has Mr. K. W. Breadner also resigned as Paper Controller?


Sir HENRY DRAYTON:: 1.	Mr. Pringle in his letter of resignation made the following statement:-
"I am afraid I will have to, ask you to relieve me from the distribution of newsprint. I may say that for the last two or three months the matter has been most troublesome and has been taking my whole time. Some of the manufacturers, as you are aware, are refusing to comply with my orders, which will necessitate drastic action being taken. My staff is limited and the work is becoming very burdensome. You have other departments of the Government under which this distribution could probably be better carried on, and orders enforced."
2.	Mr. Breadner was appointed controller only temporarily pending other arrangements and particularly to deal with the Fort Frances Pulp and Paper Company question.


CANADA'S CONTRIBUTION TO LEAGUE OF NATIONS.
Hon.   A@: Out of what appropriation was the sum of $64,043.15 paid on February 13 as Canada's contribution to the expense of the League of Nations?	'


Newton Wesley Rowell: It was paid out of the Demobilization Vote.


RURAL CREDITS IN CANADA.
Mr. ROSS:: 1.	Has the Government considered, since the signing of the armistice, the introduction of legislation to permit of the organization of a system of rural credits in Canada?
2.	If so, when does it intend to introduce such legislation?


Henry Lumley Drayton: 1 and 2. The subject is under consideration; due notice will be given if any such legislation contemplated.


QUEBEC-SAGUENAY RAILWAY FREIGHT RATES.
*Mr. CASGRAIN:: 1.	Is the Government aware that the freight rates prevailing on the Quebec and Saguenay
railway by far exceed those in force upon other railways in Canada?
2.	If so, what is the reason for this condition of affairs?
3.	By whom were these rates made and authorized to be put in force?
4.	Is it the intention of the Government to
reduce said rates to conform with rates on oilier roads?	[DOT]
5.	If so, when? If not, why?


Han. Mr. REID:: 1.	Local class rates on the Quebec and Saguenay railway are not higher than those on other roads. These rates were fixed by traffic officials of the Canadian National railways.
2,	3, 4 and 5. Answered by No. 1.


WHARF REPAIRS IN CHARLEVOIX-MONTMORENCY.
[Stage Direction]
*AIr. CASGRAIN:
1.	Are urgent repairs necessary to the following wharves in the county of 'Charlevoix-Montmorency, in the province of Quebec: Baie St. Paul, lie au Coudres, Les Eboulements, St. Trenee, Murray Bay, Cap a l'Aigle. St. Fidele, St. Simeon and Ste. Anne de Beaupre?
2.	If so, has tlie Government made any provision in the Estimates to be submitted thus session to cover these repairs?
3.	What are the amounts appropriated for each of these wharves?
4.	When will the said repairs be commenced?
Hon. Air. REID:: 1.	Repairs are required at all wharfs mentioned except St. Fidele.
2,	3 and 4. Information, will be given when the Estimates are laid before Parliament.


RAILWAY CHARTER FOR TEMISCOUATA.
Mr. FAFARD:: 1.	Has the Government, within the last few years, granted a charter for the construction of a railway between St. Camille, county of Belle-chasse., and C.abano, county of Temiscouata? If so, on what date?
2.	Has the Government granted any subsidies in this connection?
3.	Have all the sudsidies been granted or part of them only?
4.	If not, why?


Hon. Air. REID:: 1.	No. t
2.	Yes.
3.	Part only.
4.	Subsidies have lapsed. SUPERANNUATED RAILWAY EMPLOYEES.


Mr. GAUVREAU:: 1.	Is the Government aware that the old superannuated employees of the I. C.R. are receiving inadequate pension and not at all in relation with the cost of living?

2.	If 86, is the Department of Railways ready to grant them an annual [bonus similar to the one granted to civil' servants?


Hon. Mr. REID:: 1.	The matter of increased pensions for employees of the Intercolonial Railway cannot be dealt with 'until a final scheme is decided upon, which will be uniform on the whole Canadian National Railway system.
2.	No.


JOSEPH DUPONT.
Mr. GAUVREAU:: 1.	Is Joseph Dumont (should read Dupont), of S't. Roch des-Aulnaies, county of ITslet, still employed by the Government as customs or excise officer or in any other capacity?
2.	If so, why has he been appointed and what are the duties he performed' at that place?
3.	What is his salary?
4.	What amount has he collected during the past five years?
5.	What is the date of his appointment?
6.	Does he make reports. If so, how many?
7.	Does the Government consider that in, the public interest it is necessary to maintain this employee?


Hon. Mr. BURRELL:: 1.	Not now employed.
2.	As Preventive Officer, Excise Service.
3.	Was $200 per annum.
4.	Nil.
5.	Was appointed on August 15, 1912, and services dispensed with on February 1, 1918.
6.	Has made reports. Four.
7.	Answered by No. 1.


IMPORTATION OP WHEAT IN 1919.
Mr. MICHAUD:: ,1. How many bushels of wheat were imported to Canada from the United States during the year 1919?
2. How much duty was collected on wheat imported from the United1 States during the year 1919?


Hon. Mr. BURRELL:: 1.	69,714 bushels.
2.	Nil.


NECESSARY PUBLIC WORKS IN QUEBEC.
Mr. CASGRAIN:: 1.	Has the Government received any communication regarding certain public works needed at the following places in the province of Quebec: petite Riviere St. Francois, Murray Bay (St. Etiennne de la Malbaie), St. Fidele, St. Simfion, Ile-au-Coudres, Point-au-Pic, Port-au-Persil, Baie des Rochers, In the county of Charlevoix; and Ste. Anne de Beauprg, in the county of Montmorency?
2.	If so, what is the decision of the Government regarding the advisability of proceeding with the said works?


Hon. Mr. REID:: 1.	Yes, for Petite Riviere St. Francois, St. Etienne de la Malbaie, St. Fidele, St.
[Mr. Gauvreau.1
Simeon, lie au Coudres, Pointe au Pic and Ste. Anne de Beaupre; no for port au . Persil and Baie des Rochers.
2.	Information will be given when Estimates are laid before Parliament.
HOUSE OF COMMONS STAFF:	REORGANI-


ZATION.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. VERV/ILLE:	.
1.	Has the re-elassiftcation or re-organization of the House of Commons staff been proceeded with since the last session?
2.	If so, is it complete or at what fetage is it now?.
3.	Is it the intention to submit said re-classification to the House for its approval during the present Session?
4.	Is is the intention to provide at the same time for the placing on the retiring list of officials of the House who have passed a certain age and who, for that reason may not be able to fulfil their -duties as effectively as required?
Mr. SPEAKER:: The answer to the first
question is "yes;" to the second, "nearing completion." To the third question, " yes;" to the fourth question, " under consideration."


GRAND TRUNK STOCK.
Mr. CALDWELL:: 1.	What were the different classes of the Grand Trunk Railway Company's stock quoted at -in January, 1918, as regards, First Preference Stock five per cent; Second Preference Stock five per cent; Third Preference Stock four per cent; Ordinary or Common Stock; Five per cent Grand Trunk Debenture Stocks; Five per cent Great Western Debenture Stocks; Four per cent Grand Trunk Debenture Stocks; Four per cent Northern Debenture Stock?
2.	What were the same stocks quoted'at in January, 1919, and January, 1920?
3.	Has any of the stock of the Grand Trunk Railway Company been sold or changed hands since January, 1918?
4.	If so, who were the purchasers of it, what was the date of purchase or transfer, and what was the price paid?
5.	Has any member of the present Government ever held any of the stock of the Grand Trunk Railway Company, either personally or by proxy through any other person?
6.	If so, what are the names _of said members, what amount of stock was so acquired, on what date and on what terms?


Rt. Hon. Sir GEORGE FOSTER:: In
regard to numbers 5 and 6 of this question, Mr. Speaker, I may say promptly that no present member of the Government ever held any of the stock of the 'Grand Trunk Railway Company either personally or by proxy, or through any other medium.


LOTBINIERE AND MEGANTIC RAILWAY.
Mr. CASGRAIN:: 1.	Has the Government any knowledge of a railway called the Lotbiniere and' Megantic?
2.	If so, where is the said railway located?

3.	Who now owns and operates the said road?
4.	Has the Government any interest therein?
5.	If so, to what extent? '
6.	When was the said interest acquired?
7.	By what legislation or Order in Council, if any?
8.	What was the date of said legislation or Order in Council?


Hon. Mr. REID:: 1.	Yes.
2.	From Lyster to St. Jean des Chaillons, P.Q.
3.	The company.
4.	5, 6, 7 and 8. An Order in Council dated December 1, 1919, gives authority for the purchase of this railway, hut the transfer has not yet been made.


PURCHASE OF GOVERNMENT SUPPLIES.
Mr. STEVENS:: 1.	In what manner is the purchasing of supplies for the various Governmental departments now carried out?
2.	Is the War Purchasing Commission still
operating?	.
3.	If so, who are the members ot the said Commission?
4.	Is it the intention of the Government to introduce a Bill this session to organize the Purchasing Commission on a permanent basis?


George Green Foster: The purchasing of supplies for the various governmental departments has been carried out by the War Purchasing Commission which is still in operation. The members of the commission are Sir Hormisdas Laporte, Mr. Brown and Mr. Lecky. The Government will make known its intention when it has come to a conclusion on the matter.


RURAL MAIL CARRIERS.
Mr. DEMERS:: 1.	Has the Government received petitions, or - have any representations been made to, concerning the rural mail carriers employed by contracts previous to 1918?
2.	Has the Government realized that, owing to the abnormal increase of prices on all things since the awarding of these contracts, the services of these mail carriers are not sufficiently remunerated?
3.	Does the Government intend to take into account these exceptional conditions created since the awarding of these contracts, and act accordingly ?


Hon. Mr. ROWELL:: 1.	Yes.
2.	and 3. In dealing with applications
from rural mail carriers for increased remuneration or for release from their contractual obligations full consideration is invariably given to the increase in operating expenses, and whenever it can be shown that a mail carrier entered into his contract at a time when	it was
impossible to foresee the abnormal rise in the cost of necessities and that he is consequently fulfilling the terms of his contract at a financial loss through no fault of his own, steps are taken to invite public tenders for a new contract which when completed .leads to the release of the old contractor.
This is the full extent to which the Government can go as under the terms of the Post Office Act no additional remuneration may be given to a mail contractor in excess of his contract rate unless it can be shown that additional equipment and carriers are necessary to properly perform the work or unless there has been an increase in the frequency of the service, or distance travelled.


CITY MAIL DELIVERIES IN QUEBEC.
Mr. DEMERS:: What are the cities and towns of the Province of Quebec in which the city mail delivery has been established?


Newton Wesley Rowell: Montreal, Quebec, Three Rivers, Sherbrooke, St. Hyacinthe, Shawenegan Falls, Hull.
UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS. Mr. Fafard:
For a copy of all documents, letters, telegrams and other correspondence in the hands of the Government concerning the proposed railway between St. Camille, County of Belle-chasse, and Cabano, County of Temiscouata.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS.

Mr. ROSS:: 1.	How many chartered banks were there in Canada in 1880?
2.	How many chartered banks are there in Canada at the present time?
3.	What profits, as shown by their annual statements, were made by each of the chartered banks in the years 1911, 1912, 1913, 1914, 1915, 1916, .1917, 1918 and 1919?
4.	What taxes did each pay to the Federal Treasury in each of the above years?
5.	What amount, not being interest on money borrowed, did the Federal Government pay to each chartered bank in each of the years 1914, 1915, 1916, 1917, 1918 and 1919, for service rendered?
6.	What is the paid-up capital of each bank, and what is its reserve?


Mr. ROSS:: 1.	What number of automobiles valued under $1,000 were imported into Canada in each of the years 1918 and 1919?
2.	What number valued at between $1,000 and $2,000?
3.	What number at a greater valuation than $2,000?
4.	What was the duty collected on these automobiles?

5.	What was the duty collected on parts of automobiles imported during the years 191S and 1919?
G. On what number of automobiles valued at less than $1,000 was excise duty paid in the years 191S and 1919?
7.	On what number of automobiles valued at between $1,000 and $2,000 was excise duty paid in the same years?
8.	On what number of automobiles valued at over $2,000 was excise duty paid in the same years?
9.	What was the amount of such excise duty? "Mr. CASGRAJN:
1.	How many investigations were held by the Board of Commerce since its formation?
2.	Where were they held?
3.	How many orders or decisions were given by the said board?
4.	What affect did these decisions or orders have on the high cost of living?
5.	How many sentences and fines were imposed and what are the names of the parties so sentenced or fined?
6.	What has been the cost of the investigations and proceedings of the board to date?
7.	Did the board retain the services of experts to help It in the discharge of its duties?
8.	If so, what are the names of said experts and where do they reside?
9.	How much has been paid to each of them?
10.	Are they still in the employ of the board?


*Mr. CASGRAIN:: 1.	What are the names of the tenderers for the works to be done at the following places in the county of Montmorency, Quebec: Ste. Anne de Beaupre, Ste. Famille-Ile d'Orleans, St. Francois du Sud-Ile-d'Orleans, St. Jean-Isle d'Orleans, lie de la Quarantine, Pointe aux Trembles?
2.	Where do they reside?
3.	What was the amount of each tender?
4.	Who were the successful tenderers?
5.	Have the said works been started?
6.	When will they be completed?


Mr. KENNEDY:: What was the number of persons or corporations paying and the aggregate amount paid by each group by way of Dominion income tax in the city of Toronto during the fiscal years 1917 and 1918, whose assessed income was over $1,500,	$6,000,	$10,000,	$20,000,	$30,000,
$50,000, $100,000?
*-Mr. PARENT:
1.	What was the total amount of the gross consolidated debt of Canada on the 28th of February, 1920?.
2.	What was the total amount of the net consolidated debt of Canada on the same date?
3.	What was the total amount of the assets of the consolidated debt of Canada on the said date?
4.	What was the total amount of the yearly interest payable on the gross consolidated debt of Canada on the said date?
5.	What was the total amount of yearly interest or revenue received or collected by Canada in respect to the property or securities constituting the assets of the public debt?
6.	What was the total amount of the floating debt of Canada on the 28th of February, 1920?
7.	What was the total amount of yearly interest payable on the floating debt of Canada on the said date?


Mr. TOBIN:: 1.	How many employees are there in the Inside Service of the Finance Department including the Insurance Branch? [DOT]
2.	How many are males?
3.	How many are females?
4.	How many males are French?
5.	How many females are French?
6.	How many males are Protestants?
7.	How many females are Protestants?



CIVIL SERVICE RE-CLASSIFICATION.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. ,1. A. C. ETHIER (Laval-Two Mountains) moved:
For a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams and reports relating to tt|e re-classification of the Civil Service by American efficiency experts in the employ of the Arthur Young Company; also all documents relating thereto, which have been submitted to, and received by the Civil Service Commission and comprising: (a) a list of names who, in consequence of such re-classification and subsequently thereto, resigned from the service; (b) the reasons given in support of such resignations, and (c) the nature of the duties of each person who i-esigned.
George Green Foster: There would be ho objection to the passage of that with this observation, that the call made in the first part of the resolution would necessitate the employment of an army of clerks-I do not know how large. What the purpose of gathering that vast, desultory correspondence from all parts of the Dominion would he I cannot say. To the main parts of the motion (a), (b) and (c), the Government has no objection and with this ab-servation I have no objection to the motion passing.


Jacques Bureau: Are these the same people who made the classification for the state of New York?


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think they are the same company.	*


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Motion stands.



EXPORT BUTTER AND CHEESE.


[Stage Direction]
Mr. JOHN W. EDWARDS (Frontenac) moved:
That, in the opinion of this House, the dairy farmers of Canada are annually suffering great loss through the lack of systematic grading of their products, and whereas it is desirable that a system of grading of butter and cheese should be established to the end that Canada may successfully compete in foreign markets, the Government of Canada, should, as soon as possible, take whatever steps are necessary to standardize and grade Canadian butter and cheese intended for export.
He said: Mr. Speaker, I might preface my remarks or argument in connection with
[Stage Direction]
this resolution by stating that from the standpoint of the value of dairy products the banner county of the Dominion of Canada is the county of Oxford. From the standpoint of the value of the cheese products of Canada, the county which I have the honour to represent stands fourth in the list, being beaten in the order named by Leeds, Hastings and Dundas. I want to place some figures before this House this afternoon with the view of trying to impress upon it, and especially upon those members who come from city constituencies, the importance of the dairy industry to the future well being of this Dominion. If any hon. member were presenting an argument in favour of some manufacturing establishment in one of our large centres of population, he would no doubt call attention to the amount of capital invested in Canada, the wages paid, the time spent in the production of the article, and so on.
May I invite the attention of hon. members-and again I say particularly members from city constituencies-to a few figures which I shall place on Hansard with a view to impressing on the members of this House the importance of the dairy industry. The number of milch cows in the Dominion of Canada in 1917", as estimated in a report which I have here, is 3,564,075. The value of these milch cows, at an average of $100 each, which I think is a very low estimate to place upon them, would be $356,407,500. I say I consider a value of $100 is low because I have noticed in any sales which have taken place in my county for the last two or three years that the average amount paid for cows is more nearly $125 or $150 than $100, but putting it at $100, we have for the value of the cows alone the figure which I have given. Mr. Speaker, I ask your considera-4 p.m. tion to these further facts. If we allow seven and a half minutes for the milking of a cow-and if I may be permitted the expression I think that is going some-there would be an average of fifteen minutes a day spent in the operation of milking each cow, which amounts to 891,018 hours employed eve.y day fin Canada in that operation. If we place a value on the time of those engaged at only 20 cents an hour, or at a rate of $2 a day for a 10 hour day-and I am surely placing the rate very low-it would represent an outlay of $178,203 for each day for that operation alone. If we take 30 days to the month for 8 months only-the factory season-the cost of milking would amount 38
to $42,768,720. If we assign to each milker the task of milking eight cows, it means that an army of 445,509 persons performed this work twice a day for at least 8 months of the year. I have given those figures- and I do not think they can be challenged -with the view of impressing upon hon. members the importance of this industry.
I need not argue that if any gentleman could come before this House representing any industry with a capital of over $300,000,000 and an outlay of over $42,000,000 for only a part of the operation of producing that one article, and giving employment to over 400,000 people he would have a right to the attention and consideration of every hon, member.
But many other things besides those 1 have mentioned are fairly chargeable to the cost of producing butter and cheese. A portion of the value of the land and buildings should be charged to capital investment, Then there is the cutting and the storing of feed, the care of the animals, and the conveying of the milk to the factories and creameries-all of which represent an enormous investment and a very considerable expenditure of time, labour and skill.
We had in 1917-and I suppose the figures are about. the same now-949 creameries patronized by 139,032 patrons; 1,900 cheese factories with 67,030 patrons; 549 combined, butter and cheese factories with 38,344 patrons; or in all 3,398 of these establishments with 244,406 patrons. The capital invested amounted to $19,628,000; the number of persons employed 10,391; the amount paid in salaries and wagds $5,447,346. The total amount paid to patrons in one year, 1917, was $73,863,845; the amount expended for fuel $834,036; for wages $5,447,346; for materials $3,844,699, and for miscellaneous expenditure $2,498,334, or a total expenditure of $86,488,260.
In 1917 these factories produced 87,526,939 pounds of butter, valued at $34,274,218; 194,904,336 pounds of cheese valued at $41,180,623; and other products worth $18,424,485, or a total value of $93,879,326.
The dairy industry has been developed in all parts of the country, especially the butter-making branch pf it. In 1900 the amount of butter produced was 36,066,739 pounds, valued at $7,240-,972; in 1917, it amounted to 87,526,939 pounds, valued at $34,274,218. The quantity of cheese made in 1900 amounted to 220,833,269 pounds, valued at $22,221,430; in. 1917,	194,904,336 pounds
was manufactured, valued at $41,180,623. So although the quantity of cheese in 1917 was
[Stage Direction]


less than in 1900, the value-was practically double.
I	wish now to draw the attention of the House to the graded cheese made in 1917, and I refer particularly to the cheese produced by the three principal provinces, Ontario, Quebec and Prince Edward Island. Ontario produced 1,087,000 boxes; Quebec
755.000	boxes; Prince Edward Island over
17.000	boxes. What I wish to particularly call attention to, Mr. Speaker, is that 93.38 per cent of the cheese made in Ontario graded No. 1, 6.42 per cent graded No. 2, and .20 per cent graded No. 3. In the province of Quebec, 70.88 per cent of the cheese graded No. 1, 27.13 per cent graded No. 2, and 1.99 per cent graded No. 3. In Prince Edward Island 90.85 per cent graded No. 1, 9 per cent graded No. 2, and .15 per cent giaded No. 3. For the whole of Canada 84.22 per cent graded No. 1, 14.85 per cent graded No. 2, and .93 graded No. S.
I might say in this connection that 98 per cent of the cheese from central Ontario- the district from Kingston westward-graded No. 1, which I venture to say is a record that cannot be beaten by any country.
But I would like to point out that producers of cheese suffered a very great loss on account of the low grading of a part of their product. There is no reason in the world why 6.62 per cent of the cheese from Ontario should grade below No. 1. The cut on No. 2 cheese as against No. 1 is one-half a cent a pound at Montreal. We will assume that all cheese below No. 1 is No. 2 and we will estimate the loss on the basis of one-half a cent a pound. On that basis the loss to Ontario in 1917 on account of this cheese not being graded No. 1 was $39,987. A larger percentage of Quebec cheese was graded under No. 1; their loss amounted to $98,360. Prince Edward Island lost $1,028, making a total loss due to low grade of the product amountr ing to $139,375 in one year.
Now, let me follow that up by a reference to butter. A classification was made of butter commandeered by the Canada Food Board covering the period from October 1 to November 9, 1918. This butter was taken from Ontario, 'Quebec, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, and well qualified men expressed their opinion with regard to its quality. I shall not give you the number of boxes obtained from each province, but what I wish to impress upon hon. members is this: They graded that butter as No, 1, No. 2 and No. 3, and "No grade." Of the butter which was examined, the percentages graded No. 1 were as follows: Ontario,

70.73; Quebec, 94.48; Alberta, 90.26; Saskatchewan, 71.66; Manitoba, 81.10. In 1917 *-and I assume that the conditions are very much the same now-Quebec -was far in advance of all the other provinces not only in the production and value of creamery butter, but in the quality as well. I regret to see the Ontario producers at the foot of the list in the matter of qualify. That 94.48 per cent of Quebec butter should grade No. 1 is, I say, highly creditable to the producers of that province. That only 70.73 per cent of Ontario butter should grade No. 1 is not creditable to the producers of Ontario, nor is it, in my opinion, pxcusable.
. I do not know what reduction is made for the grades of butter which are below No. 1, but suppose we allow a cut of 2 cents a pound. Possibly there would not be that much difference between No. 2 butter and ,No. 1; it is my personal opinion that the difference would be greater. However, if we allow only 2 cents a pound off all the grades below No. 1, let us see what it meant .to Ontario and to- the other provinces to have these inferior grades of butter. Ontario would lose in that year, on the basis of the butter produced in the creamery, of which we have a record, $167,979. Quebec would lose $37,831; Alberta, $17,440; Saskatchewan, $24,917; Manitoba, $20,870, a total of $269,037. On the total production of butter in the Canadian creameries in 1917, the loss due to poor quality would amount to $311,596. But this does not (represent the total loss because I have referred only to the butter produced in the (Creameries. What of the enormous quantities of butter which are made by the people on the farms, and so on? In view of the fact that only 70 per cent of Ontario butter graded No. 1, I am safe in taking *that as a criterion for all the butter produced in the province; consequently the loss on account of poor quality must have been very great indeed, i Mr. Speaker, the figures that I have given indicate very clearly the necessity of doing something to standardize or to bring up the quality of this article. But while my resolution does state as a fact that the producers are losing thousands of dollars yearly because of lack of systematic grading, it goes on to say that we should have a uniform standard of the butter for [DOT]export. The various provinces may deal with the quality of the butter produced for consumption in those provinces, but it is the duty of this Government and of this Parliament to look after the butter which

is exported. I want to deal particularly with the export of our surplus butter which .goes overseas. Canada is the best market for Canadian butter, but in order to maintain the home market as our best market we must find buyers in other countries for our surplus production, and in order to be sure of obtaining buyers in other countries ;we must produce butter which is equal to jthe best offered by any other country.
, Now, let me give you a few figures of .our exports of butter and cheese from the (port of Montreal for the years 1916, 1917, 1918, and 1919. First, butter:
Quantity
Tear	(Packages). Value,
me	
177,189	$3,426,7411917	
48,359	1,188,2511918	
143,573	3,778,8411919	
79,155'	2,612,115
Then, here are the figures with regard to cheese:
Quantity.
Tear.	(Boxes).	Value.1916	
2,142,699	$33,822,5031917	
1,660,675	29,618,1341918	
1,619,321	31,078,8921919	
1,172,460	26,718,896
This represents a total export of butter from Montreal in four years of 25,103,288 pounds, valued at $11,005,948, and of cheese of over 545,000,000 pounds, worth $121,238,425. An industry in which so much money is involved, and the export of the product of which runs into millions, is certainly deserving of the sympathetic consideration of every member of this House.
Conditions in regard to dairying, especially in regard to the marketing of our cheese, have, for many years, not been as good as they might have been. Resolutions have been passed in this House from time to time calling attention to injustices to and grievances of dairymen, and they have received, not from this Government, but from former governments, very little ,consideration. In 1908, 600 dairymen met in the city of Ottawa in convention and placed their grievances before the Government. In 1911, a delegation of over 800 waited on the Government and asked for redress of their grievances. Nothing, however, was done in a practical way to accede to their requests, although, I suppose, something was done when the Deputy Minister of Trade and Commerce, Mr. W. G. Parmelee, was appointed as a Royal Commission to investigate * the matter; but the investigation was held behind closed doors, and the then Minister of Agriculture, the Hon. Sydney Fisher, instructed him, to use his own words: "Don't go into too many details; I count on you to do 384
everything you can to prevent any party capital being made from this." Mr. Parmelee occupied two years in this investigation,' examining forty-eight witnesses in that time, or an average of two witnesses a month, so that he did not overwork himself. The matter hung on in that way, and nothing was done until 1912. T brought the matter up in this House in the session of 1912 asking for the appointment of a commission to investigate the whole subject of the weighing in Montreal. A commission was appointed, and following a report of that commission, a referee was appointed in the city of Montreal to whom the producer of cheese might apply in case he felt he ,was not getting a fair deal in the matter of weights. But for all that, I maintain that at the present time and under present conditions, producers of cheese-here I speak particularly for the people of Eastern Ontario and Western Quebec, because those are the-two sections where cheese production is carried on to the greatest extent-are suffering very extensive losses in the way their cheese is being marketed. A man ships 500 cheese to Montreal, those cheese having been sold as No. 1 cheese. All cheese, of course, are sold as No. 1; the price paid on the cheese sold is for No. 1 cheese, and the cheese-maker is employed on the understanding that he is to make No. 1 cheese. 500 cheese are sold from a certain factory and they go to Montreal. The price to be paid for those cheese, was, let us say, 21 cents, that being the price that the buyer agreed to pay for No. 1 cheese. 'If there is a good stiff demand for cheese, I venture to say that that deal will go through without any trouble at all; but if the big exporters of Montreal get cables from overseas to the effect that the cheese market has fallen off about half a cent, then there is trouble; the wires get busy, and the man in Montreal wires back to his buyer in Kingston, for instance: "Those 500 cheese you bought for me is off flavour; something is wrong with them." The maker of the cheese is several hundred miles away from Montreal, and although he does not think that he is being used squarely, what is he to do? Will he get on the train, go down to Montreal in order to look the thing over, and put up a fight? If he does that, he must employ somebody to take his place in the factory, and may be while he is away there will be cheese produced that will be off flavour. He simply has to submit to his loss, and the result is that under those conditions we have in Ontario to-day some of the very best cheese-
[Stage Direction]
makers going out of business. The cheese-maker does not know from day to day where he stands; there may be such a cut made on his cheese that all his profits for the summer will be swept away, and he feels that he is in the hands of the men who are carrying on the export business; that they are going to protect themselves, if necessary, at his expense. I maintain that that could not happen if our cheese was graded at the port of Montreal. In that case, all that the big exporter could get out of the deal would be his commission, and he is entitled to that; but the cheese would be graded and sold as No. 1 or No. 2 as the case might be, and the same thing will apply, of course, to butter.
But there is another reason why our cheese and butter should be graded. I maintain that a proper systematic grading of butter and cheese is the only possible way by which Canada can hope successfully to compete in the markets of the world for our surplus production of those two articles. Let us for a moment take into consideration what has been done by certain other countries. Denmark aims to export only one grade of butter, and that the best. The grading in Denmark is under State control, three judges being appointed by the Government to judge and grade the butter. One of those judges is a State inspector; one is a butter dealer, and one is a butter maker, and they do the grading. In Holland, all export butter must bear the Government mark "Netherlands Butter Control". In New Zealand, all export butter must be inspected by a Government official and have the grade marked on the package; not only that, the Government of New Zealand also thinks it worth while to send an experienced man to London and to keep him there to examine each cargo of butter on arrival and to check the quality of each lot carrying a distinctive brand. The grading of Irish butter is in the hands of the Irish Butter Export Committee, and there is a special and four ordinary grades. In Canada there have been some slight attempts at grading in some of the provinces; but as regards grading for export, the only semblance of systematic grading we ever had was that carried on at Montreal by Mr. Burgess, of the Dairy and Cold Storage Branch during 1917, 1918 and part of 1919, when the cheese exported were graded as first, second and third. If Canada is to compete successfully in the markets of the world, we must adopt a uniform and systematic method of grading for both butter and cheese.

I should like to quote to this House a statement made in this House by Mr. Girard, formerly member for Chicoutimi-Saguenay in the province of Quebec, Mr. Girard was for many years very closely connected with the dairy interests of this province and took a deep interest in anything relating to the dairy interest. Speaking in this House on March 21, 1912, he said (Hansard p. 5733):
The Cheese Exporters' Association of Montreal insists that, whenever one-third of a lot of cheese is found to be No. 2 or No. 3, the whole shipment, even should the remainder be of the very first quality, be rated as No. 2 or No. 3,
according to the case	Of course, the
buyer who has succeeded in putting through such a deal is very careful to classify in his store the products so bought and to sell in England No. 1 cheese as such, and No. 2 cheese as such also.
You can easily see where the producer gets off at in a deal like that. Further on he says:
The Quebec Dairymen's Association	
has suggested as the only remedy for such an evil, the grading of dairy products.
Still further on he says:
I appeal'to this House, I appeal more especially to my fellow members from the province of Quebec: Is it not urgent that a movement should be set on foot at once so that dairy products may be sold under their true designation on the British market, in the same way that in every country on all markets, products of various kinds, are sold under the designation of the maker and of the country of origin?
With these expressions of opinion I am heartily in accord. A meeting was held at the Chateau Laurier in Ottawa last week which was attended, I understand, by deputy ministers of Agriculture from all the provinces of the Dominion. At that meeting a resolution was proposed by the Deputy Minister of Agriculture for the province of Saskatchewan, and seconded, I believe, by the Deputy Minister of Agriculture for the province of Manitoba, asking this Government to do practically what I am asking i-t to do in this resolution. I have not their resolution before me, but I think I am right in my statement; if not, the minister will correct me.
The other day I received a circular from the Retail Merchants' Association, of Canada, and without going very extensively into its subject matter, I may say that it had to do with oleomargarine. I do not think very much of oleomargarine myself. I never eat it if I know beforehand what is put before me, but I want to say this: The dairying interests of this country should receive some

protection from the Government in regard to that article. I do not think the makers of oleomargarine should be permitted to use the word " butter " in their newspaper advertisements and poster advertising. In order to help their sales, they use the word to give a certain air of respectability to the conglomeration which they ask the public to buy. I do not think "they should be allowed to use the word " butter " at all in any of their advertisements.
In this circular the statement is made that unless the importation and manufacture of oleomargarine is permitted to continue, and made part of the policy of this country, a lot of people are going to starve because not enough butter is produced in Canada to supply the home demand. I think I can answer that statement conclusively by placing before this House figures of our imports and exports of butter for the last five or six years. In 1914 we imported 7,317,259 lbs. of butter, and we exported 1,228,753 lbs. These figures, I admit, show conclusively that we did not produce enough butter in 1914 to supply the needs of our people. In 1915 our imports fell to 6,822,540 lbs., and our exports rose to 2,724,913. lbs. Again, the figures' show that we did not produce enough in 1915 to supply the home demands. In 1916 our imports dropped to 4,309,831 lbs. and our exports rose to 3,441,183 lbs. Again the same statements holds true. In 1917, our imports amounted to 997,335 lbs., while our exports amounted to 7,990,435. There is only one conclusion to draw from those figures, and that is that in the Dominion of Canada in the year 1917 we produced more than sufficient butter to supply the home market, and we had to look to other countries for a market for our surplus production. In 1918, our imports dropped to 434,049 lbs., while our exports amounted to 4,926,154 lbs. Again, the figures show conclusively that we produced more than enough butter in 1918 to supply the home demand. In 1919 our imports amounted to 1,939,062 lbs. and our exports to 13,659,157 lbs. It will be noticed that from 1914 down to the present time our imports grew less year by year, while our exports gradually increased until they reached the figure of 13,659,157 lbs. in the year 1919. Then for the ten months ending January 31, 1920, our exports amounted to 14,118,541 lbs. These figures can leave no doubt in any one's mind that we produced, and are producing in ever-increasing quantities, more than sufficient butter to meet the home demand, and therefore in years to come we
must look more and more to other markets in which to dispose of our surplus production.
It is undoubtedly true that those' countries which have undertaken a systematic grading of their butter and cheese have made a world-wide reputation for their dairy products. The mere mention of Danish or New Zealand butter carries with it the assurance that it is No. 1 quality. Butter from Denmark, from Holland, New Zealand and all other countries which have adopted a systematic grading has made a world-wide reputation for itself. If our production keeps on increasing, we must look to foreign countries for a market, and it is the countries I have mentioned that we will have to compete with. We should therefore build up such a reputation for our product that the whole world will know that Canadian butter is just as good as the best produced anywhere on earth.
Might I call attention to this further fact *-and I do not think it is fair to the dairying industry in this country. In 1918, for instance, we permitted 2,262,514 pounds of oleomargarine to come into this country, and in 1919, 4,217,916 pounds. I have not the figures for the still later period, but I have no doubt they were greater, to say nothing of the amount that is manufactured in Canada. If we brought in, in the year ,1919, 4,217,000 pounds of oleomargarine-we exported that year 13,600,000 pounds of butter-it is obvious that we were obliged to look in various countries all over the face of the globe to find a iparket for over 4,217,000 pounds of butter which was displaced ,by this questionable concoction. If I were to tell bon. gentlemen who represent city constituencies, and who perhaps have a personal interest in one manufacturing concern or another, that all protection should he moved from the particular article in /which they were interested, and that that article should be made to compete with the same product from all parts of the world, those gentlemen, I fancy, would unhesitatingly denounce this proposal as being eminently unfair, and would straightway begin to tell me how much they had invested in the business, the number of people who were employed in it, and the amount of wages paid. Why, Sir, in regard to industries that are nurtured by a protective tariff, what argument could be advanced with greater force than on behalf of this particular industry? That is the contention that would be submitted. People who dwell in cities are unfortunately ignorant of many important things, notwithstanding the
[Stage Direction]
knowledge which their civic life gives them. They know a great many things, but they are entirely ignorant of conditions as they exist in the country. Indeed, their knowledge of those conditions is often woefully lamentable, and I say this with no offensive intent whatever, but merely as expressing ,a matter of fact. A very clever and astute hon. gentleman in this House, who has the misfortune to have lived in the city all his life, said to me: "I could not have the face to tell the people in my city, the labouring men with large families, that they could ,not have their oleomargarine, but must pay the present price of butter." In reply, I asked him this question:	"How would it
,do to take all the duties off the particular article which yqur firm is making? Probably that might result in a saving in that direction to these labouring men, who would have all the more to spend on Canadian butter." He could not see the proposition just in that light. I want to impress on this House, Mr. Speaker, that we have, in dairying, an industry in which is invested an enormous amount of capital, and in which a great number of people are directly interested. It is an industry which, I venture to say, from the standpoint of capital invested, from the standpoint of wages paid, and from the standpoint of time and skill .expended in its development, is the most important in the Dominion of Canada, and one which will have a greater effect upon the future prosperity and well-being of the *country than any other industry that can be named. If this be true, then I say that the industry is one which we must foster and push forward in every possible way; and I cannot see how it is possible for our dairy industry to compete in the markets of the world, with countries which are great producers of dairy products and which have paid special attention to the standardizing of all their products, unless we take similar steps. Before resuming my seat, I desire to quote a statement made by J. 8. Dunnet, in "Hoard's Dairyman." It is headed: "Striking Results from Uniform .Grading in Australia," and is as follows:
The war exerted one very important effect on the dairying industry in Australia. It developed the system of government control. Though this was in vogue in a limited way the anti-grading faction wielded enough influence to check the best results. But when the British Government bought the whole surplus, grading as it should be practised became one of the conditions. The results were magical. First grade and over rose from 43 per cent to 96.4 per cent. No comment is necessary.
I might call attention to the fact that we had on hand in Canada on F-bruary 1, of 
this year, over twelve and a half million pounds of butter and over nineteen million pounds of cheese. I believe thalt, under conditions which have obtained in this country, shrewd speculators bought butter in large quantities and kept it in cold storage until it deteriorated to a great extent, when it was made over and resold to the public or shipped overseas. Surely I am .safe in saying that if there are on hand at present over twelve and a half million pounds of butter, and if we are producing enough fresh butter to satisfy the home demand, it is highly probable that those who hold these surplus stocks of butter will be looking to various countries throughout the world to get a sale for them. Quebec produces butter, ninety-four per cent of which grades number one, and if that province is looking to find a market overseas for its surplus high-grade butter, the reputation of its first-class butter which may go abroad will be utterly ruined by the poor article which is made over and held in stock by these interested companies.
Both Quebec and Ontario have a surplus of butter. Ninety-four per cent of Quebec's butter, as I have said, grades number one, and only seventy per cent of Ontario's surplus grades number one. This being the case, am I not right in saying that the surplus which Ontario tries to find a market for overseas, going alongside the butter from the province of Quebec, will damn the reputation of the first-class article which is produced there? Undoubtedly it will, and such a condition of things should not exist. It is not fair to those who produce a first-class article to have its reputation jeopardized in this manner, and the only way in which this unfairness can be prevented is to have what exists in the countries I have mentioned, namely, a system of giading-I am, of course, referring only to thr quantity exported-under Government control, a system which will properly standardize the quality of butter and cheese and build up for Canada the reputation which it should tnjoy in the markets of the world for these two products, of which we are likely to have an increasing surplus as the years go on. I therefore move the resolution which stands in my name.
Mr. SAMUEL FRANCIS GLASS (Middlesex, E):: I have listened with considerable interest to the presentation of this subject by the hon. member for Frontenac, (Mr. Edwards), and having myself on several occasions in this House advocated a system of grading in regard to other commodities, it affords me much pleasure indeed to lend my support to the resolution which my hon.

friend has so ably moved. Surely it must be obvious to the Government, as well as the people of this country, that great benefits have accrued to the wool, wheat and flax industries as a result of the establishment- of a system of grading. By establishing standards we have gained a reputation for these products, and in the markets of the world to-day the reputation of an article for which any great sale is' sought is of supreme importance. Jt is an easy matter by carelessness or [DOT]neglect of standardization to lose in a single -shipment a reputation that has been -acquired with years of care. I do not intend to elaborate this but in connection with the discussion one matter came to my mind which I would like to present to the House and to the minister for consideration. I shall not attempt to offer any (solution for the difficulty which appears to me but no doubt some remedy may be applied. It is this: No doubt many hon. members have felt when they have gone into a store to make a purchase of butter, the product of some standard reputable dairy or creamery, that the name or label on the butter was a sufficient evidence of its quality. I thought that myself but my mind has been thoroughly disabused of the idea that any label or brand represents quality in butter. That, I opine, must happen in connection with shipments of dairy products overseas. The hon. member for Erontenac (Mr. Edwards) has proposed standardization, under Government supervision and examination, of these products. ,That is perfectly right but that standardization, if I understand his presentation of the subject, requires that the examination shall be prior to shipment to cold storage in Montreal. Is it not evident .every day of our lives, as we go into stores to purchase creamery butter, that the butter has so deteriorated in quality from being in cold storage that if you are depending on the brand you will find that the brand is no evidence of quality whatever. Supposing that this butter be shipped to Montreal and that with the guarantee of this Government it is branded or standardized as No. I butter. It is standardized at the time it goes into cold storage but later on in six, nine, twelve,-heaven only knows how many months-afterwards, because as long as it is in the interest of the cold storage man to hold it there for a higher profit it is held, it is finally shipped over to the markets of Europe. The product has so deteriorated in value that it must necessarily cause an injury to the dairy interests of this country.
How are we going to get over that? That butter is sold in the market of old London with the label of the factory in which it is-produeed and the Government stamp oi standardization and yet, that butter, by reason of its having been held in cold storage has so deteriorated that it is not %ven a third class butter. If such a thing as this is happening day by day in this country to our dairy products all the effort and trouble we may apply to standardization will no't avail unless we are able to correct that evil. I present this view to the. consideration of the House and the minister in the hope that there may be some solution for the difficulty.


Mr. A. M. DECHENE (Montmagny) ((Translation):: Mr. Speaker, I wish, with the consent of the House, to add a few words regarding this subject which is of particular interest to the great majority of (Canadian farmers. The proposer of this motion for once has spoken admirably of the producers of the province of Quebec. iAs a matter of fact, the production of butter and cheese has within recent years remarkably developed. Oftentimes, having ascertained certain results, we neglect tracing them back to their cause. It might be rash to conclude that because striking progress has been made along certain lines in some parts of the Dominion such progress is exclusively due to Dominion legislation. We should also take into account the legislation passed by each of the Provincial Legislatures, and especially the enforcement of the law as it stands.
We have incorporated in our Canadian statutes legislation having reference to the dairy industry, which imposes, for instance, restrictions as to the percentage of moisture that butter and cheese should contain; hut do we realize that, very often, such provisions are not enforced with sufficient rigour? In the course of my law practice J have had the opportunity more than once of seeing Government inspectors of Quebec enter creameries in order to find out if the Dominion legislation was actually enforced as strictly as that of the province of Quebec, and in very few cases was there any occasion for interference on account of there being an excess of one or two per cent of moisture. If, in some provinces, the results have not been as good as might have been expected; if, as stated by the hon. member for Frontenac (Mr. Edwards), only seventy per cent of Ontario's output grades number one, while ninety-four per cent of Quebec's butter is so graded, it might be interesting to inquire whether such result is not due

to the fact that a sufficiently close inspection of the manufacturing processes of /butter is not kept up in Ontario. The province of Quebec has enacted very strict laws and follows most closely its butter-makers. Twice, even three times, every month, the Government inspectors visit th^ creameries in order to find out whether the provisions of the Act are faithfully adhered to, and I do not think, iMr. Speaker, I am revealing a provincial secret nor any creamery's special secret, if I state that therein lies the success of that industry, bet us see to it, that the law as it stands is complied with, and the result will be a superior production throughout the country, without any need of resorting to checks more or less difficult of application, more or less cumbersome, and which always interfere with the manufacture, sale or exchange of pur produce.
The manufacturing methods must be looked after. By looking after such methods and at the same time laying down rules as regards the building and management of factories, the handling of products at the factory, the milk and the cream delivered there, we shall surely succeed in obtaining a number one product that will attract world-wide attention.
I The British market is already more difficult of access to our Denmark competitors who, according to soTiie official publications, have even had to cross over to England in order that certain restrictions imposed, upon their products should be removed.
It is better to try and produce butter which on its face is attractive to the market than to attempt to set instead some official standard which must necessarily result in destroying competition among the various provinces and between the different makers.
A big exhibition was held two years ago in the province of Ontario in Toronto, I believe. A competition was opened to all the provinces for their cheese and butter. To the great astonishment of the whole country- the Government inspectors of the Quebec Department of Agriculture excepted-the province of Quebec carried off the first prizes. The fact attracted and aroused general attention. Last winter the Western people held in their turn one of these large conventions and the Western provinces came out first, while Quebec was awarded only the third and fourth prizes; unfortunately, as complained the hon. member for Frontenac (Mr. Edwards), for his province, it was still a little farther behind.
Instead of setting arbitrary standards for export, the question would be, Mr. Speaker,
[Mr. Dech&ne.I
to go directly to the root of the evil and to promote in a practical way the manufacture of our own butter and cheese. While | the practice is gradually disappearing as regards the butter manufactured in our province, the making of two kinds of butter is allowed: butter made from ordinary cream and butter made with so-called pasteurized cream. On our markets, in Montreal particularly and almost everywhere, the butter made from pasteurized cream has always fetched a higher price, often one cent or a cent and a half more per pound. That cent and that fraction generally go direct to the butter producer, because in this country, as in New Zealand and in Denmark, the farmers have striven towards joint action and co-operation in order to obtain a product that would be more uniform and more tempting to the consumer. Concerning the pasteurized butter kept in cold storage during winter, Dominion statistics give us striking results as to the possibility of developing it into a thriving business; this butter made from ordinary cream not submitted to a special treatment, after having remained some time in the large cold storage warehouses had lost, if I am well informed, from 4 to 5 per cent, and even much more in some cases, of its original value.	-
Our farmers look carefully after the manufacture of their butter; they congregate very often to discuss matters, and their tendency, at present, is apparently to have the private concern go out of business and co-operative associations of patrons take their place. This is perhaps a deficiency which might be easily remedied by a close inspection or by a change in the provincial laws, or by means of federal legislation.
In many cases, the individual manufacturer makes butter and cheese mainly with a view to increasing his profits; he buys from the producers their milk or their cream; at a certain price, and then disposes of the product at his own sweet will. Things happen differently with respect to the products of a co-operative association. As a general rule, members of such associations bring their milk to their own factory, they make their butter and their cheese, and which is connected with what we call, in our province, "the co-operative association of the butter and cheese makers of the province of Quebec," which now has thousands of shareholders, all farmers and milk producers, belonging to some one or other of those local co-operative industries.

The main co-operative, which has its office- at Montreal, receives the butter and the cheese from the local co-operative and sells on the foreign markets, in consideration of a mere commission, the product which is sent to it from every part of the province, with the result that the producer or the farmer himself gets nearly all the possible profit from his own product, whereas, if the private concerns were more and more encouraged, the milk and cream producer would not derive from his own goods all the profit which he might.
This idea is spreading enormously in our midst, as it did in Denmark, and recently in New Zealand, where it caused the farmer-producers who deal with this branch of their industry, to reap profits which were absolutely marvellous. Here is what I find, with respect to the dairy industry, in a concise report from the United States:
" Their ,is probably no country in the world where the manufacturing of dairy products has developed so quickly and to such an enormous extent as in New Zealand, or where the scientific and mechanical details have made such marvellous strides. New Zealand has perhaps, to-day, the largest and best equipped butter and cheese factories in the world, and her farmers make use of more cream separators and milking machines than those of any other country. But not only did the New Zealanders prove their energy and their ability by this mechanical or scientific development or by the total sum of their dairy production. And it was found, with surprise, that butter pasteurized with -cream under special process, had lost a fraction of one per cent, or that this butter, so prepared, was of great value for immediate exportation.
Perhaps should we rather encourage the production of that kind of butter in our country, which would then, export it as a special brand, and to our credit on the different foreign markets. If in .many cases, our butter and our cheese happen to lose a great part of their value when they get, abroad, it is not due to the methods of manufacture or conservation, but to the manner in which they are received or dealt with, in England. Is it not a fact, and more particularly so during the war, that some four or five hundred thousand pounds of cheese have been at times left strewn at random on the wharves of Liverpool, or of London, owing to the fact that we had not the necessary warehouses in which such goods might have been taken care of before they were delivered to the British dealers.
Instead of preaching, as it did last year, that the whole matter should be brought under one principle :	<c standardization,
to use the English expression, our Department of Trade and Commerce should take action-and find out how our products are dealt with in England, and whether all the Canadian products from any part of Canada do get all the attention which they are entitled to.
With respect to Canadian cheese and butter, it has often been noticed, for instance, that certain quantities of those products coming from a certain province were the object of close attention and were properly sheltered, so as to retain their quality and therefore, their value, whereas similar products, coming from the province of Quebec especially, were left on the highways or on the wharves, probably to show that, they were of an inferior grade, and, of course, with the possible result that they might lose their good name on the market.
I think the Minister of Trade and Commerce would be acting the part of a good patriot if he would see that there were no discrimination on the foreign markets, as between the different products.
They have also achieved splendid results along the lines of co-operation and business and organization. Almost all the old butter and cheese factories belonging to private individuals became competitive es-, tablishments whose patrons are among the chief and very often the only shareholders, The result is that New Zealand has during -these last four years taken a most prominent place in the American as well as the British markets.
It might be a fault to consider only the English market as an outlet for our butter and cheese while we have a large market almost at our own doors. For the United States are importing from New Zealand, Denmark and other countries large quantities of butter and cheese. By attending to the advertising of our products in those quarters we would undoubtedly have reasons for rejoicing and our producers, our farmers, would draw large benefits from their labours.
The Danish produce itself has largely depreciated on the American market. To quote the New York Produce Review of March 3, 1920: " Buyers are now convinced that the official Danish stamp is no more an indication of that high degree of perfection which was expected and they have resolved that every shipment must be carefully inspected upon its arrival. A lot of 500 casks from Denmark arrived here on Friday via Ham-

burg, and the quality is not among the best."
(Seeing that periodicals in the United States are already complaining about the quality of the Danish product, why is it that our Department of Trade and Commerce, instead of attending solely to trifles, to the markets of South America, Africa, or India, does not attend to the direct advertising of our products in the United States, making it known that we in the province of Quebec have a produce we could ship abroad. Scarcely a month ago, there were in one warehouse over a million pounds of butter. The hon. member for Frontenac (Mr. Edwards) himself was complaining a moment ago that Quebec had an enormous surplus on hand and Ontario as well. Why then does the Department of Trade and Commerce publish a weekly bulletin if the sole purpose of that bulletin be to acquaint us with the fact that in England, Denmark, France or Norway, as well as in Spain, such and such a product could be bought or sold, when it does not refer to the American market and especially to the large markets of New York, Boston and Chicago.
The quality of our produce could undoubtedly be improved on the whole, but I think, Mr. .Speaker, what matters the most is to make it fully known abroad. By advertising it on a large scale in the United States we should reap an immediate benefit and our products would not be in danger of deterioration from the lack of accommodation or for the simple reason that on the docks in England the necessary warehouses to store them are wanting.
L do not see clearly what great use it would be to impose upon our producers a particular brand, a No. 1, requiring such and such a quality. Particularly, let us turn our attention to the processes of manufacture; let us make sure that provincial laws are well inforced everywhere and we shall thus reach our aims; the advantageous disposal of our products, the procuring to the producer of the full value and perhaps the lowering in a small measure of the cost to the consumer by doing away with the middleman, who often enhances prices by stowing large quantities of these products in the cities and compelling the unfortunate consumer to eat oleomargarine, when he could get butter if the large producer, who is to-day the same as he was during the war would not put it in the cold storage warehouses of the cities, because he prefers to let it spoil rather than allow the dropping of prices. I believe that we should thus obtain better results while the tend-
ency, originating in the war, which prompts to legislate and assume general control of things in every particular will not be profitable because competition will largely be done away with, and it is competition which ensures the best results.
Hon. S. F. TOiLMIE (Minister of Agriculture) : (Mr. Speaker, I have listened with a great deal of pleasure to the masterly way in which this resolution was introduced by the hon. member for Frontenac (Mr. Edwards) and seconded by the hon. member for East Middlesex (Mr. Glass), and supported by the hon. member for Montmagny (Mr. Dechene).
I feel that this is a most important matter, particularly when we consider that the value of our dairy products for 1919 is estimated at not less than $247,531,353. Surely under the financial conditions now prevailing in this country this is worthy of our consideration. And I want to say that the Government, as represented by the Department of Agriculture, is particularly anxious to support any movement for increased production of dairy products, and for the placing of those products on the market in such perfect condition that they will be able at least to compete on an even basis with similar products of other countries.
Under the present system most of the grading of dairy products is looked after by the Provincial Governments, that is, products that are for the most part disposed of for local consumption and for interpro-vineial trade, and this provincial grading is also accepted by United States buyers when purchasing for export to their country. A certain amount of grading was done at Montreal during 1917 and 1918, when large quantities of cheese and .butter were being exported to the Old Country, but at the present time I understand there is practically no grading done at that port.
As pointed out by the hon. member for Frontenac (Mr. Edwards), when the market is rising and cheese is in very great demand, there is very little trouble about grades; but when we have a falling market there is a considerable scramble to sell, and many producers are disappointed at the returns they receive. However, we cannot hope that grading alone will place our butter in the highest position. A campaign of education must be conducted to improve our dairy methods, so that when the cream or milk reaches the creamery or cheese factory it will he in first-class condition. It will be noted that in those provinces where close inspection is maintained the very best re-

suits are secured. We find that Quebec and Alberta occupy the highest positions for the quality of their butter, and 1 take this opportunity of complimenting the dairymen of those provinces on their excellent showing. The province of Quebec, I understand, was successful in winning the prizes for butter at the Toronto Exhibition of 1918, and in 1919 its dairymen also won prizes in Manitoba, for which they deserve all praise.
With regard to cheese, we find that Ontario stands very high, indeed,-ninety-three per cent No. 1, while Prince Edward Island is a close second with ninety per cent. The district that the hon. member for Frontenac represents has made almost a world's record in reaching a standard of ninety-eight per cent, and the dairymen there are certainly setting a very excellent example to their confreres in the Dominion.
If we can increase not only the quantify but the quality of our dairy products, I am sure we shall go a long way towards meeting the present financial demands^ of the Dominion. At the present time grading is conducted in practically the same way all over Canada. The Dominion Government about a year ago inaugurated a plan to instruct the graders of dairy products in the best methods of grading, with the result that in certain tests recently made, only a difference of a fraction of one per cent was found among them; showing the very great uniformity prevalent in the different provinces.
On the whole, I think that the figures furnished by the hon. member for Frontenac (Mr. Edwards) make rather a good showing, and I do not know of any other country that to-day could''better them, a circumstance that should be particularly gratifying to us when we consider that in many sections of the Dominion dairy farming has been only recently introduced.
In New Zealand there is no grading for home consumption. They grade for export, and when one remembers that they have to ship their butter through very warm areas and for great distances, it is apparent that with them it is simply a matter of self-defence to impose a very close grading system. Denmark, I understand, is. not carrying on any grading system at the present time; neither is Holland, another country producing a great deal of butter for the English market.
I may say that the Department of Agriculture maintains four inspectors in Great Britain to inspect our butter on its arrival and to assist generally in seeing that it ' reaches the consumer in the best possible condition.
With regard to the meeting of Deputy Ministers of Agriculture from the different provinces that has been referred to, I may say that this department has considered "the necessity of bringing together the representatives of the Provincial Departments of Agriculture with a view to assisting in the development of agriculture, to facilitate the work of the Federal and the provincial departments, to avoid duplication of work ,and to promote a better understanding all round. With that end in view we called a meeting of deputy ministers last week, and among the matters discussed was that of the grading of dairy products. The following resolution was passed:
That the Federal Minister of Agriculture is hereby respectfully requested to inauguarate a compulsory system o-f inspection and grading of Canadian dairy products offered for export for overseas trade, whenever in the judgment of his department officials such action is desirable and necessary.
I heartily approve of the establishment of a system of grading for dairy products, but on account of the unsettled condition of the markets of the world and the fact that control will likely continue in Great Britain for some time to come, we do not consider the present time opportune for putting these graders at work. This course will be followed, however, just as soon as we think the time is ripe for adopting it. If, therefore, the member for Frontenac will be good enough to withdraw his resolution I shall be very glad to do my part in carrying out what I have outlined.


Hon. H. S. BELAND (Beauce):: Mr. Speaker, I did not intend to take part in this debate, but representing as I do a district which is reputed for its development of the dairy industry, a few words on my part will not be out of place.
I was much interested in the presentation made to the House by the member for Frontenac (Mr. Edwards). The subject is one of national importance, having regard to the large quantities of cheese and butter which are exported from our country. I was particularly interested in what the hon. member said as to the relative positions of the two banner provinces, Ontario and Quebec, in the production of cheese and butter. So far as butter is concerned the figures given by my hon. friend show that the province of Quebec holds the first position in Canada. That is most gratifying indeed. In the case of cheese, however, as the percentages stated by my hon. friend show, the position is completely reversed. I have long since realized that in the matter of cheese-making many cen-

tres. in Quebec have not attained the perfection which the importance of the industry would seem to justify. When I was a much younger man than I am to-day I carried on in the province of Quebec a platform campaign for the betterment of conditions affecting the manufacture of cheese in that province.
The grading of these products is certainly a matter of great importance, but I am not far from sharing the opinion expressed by the member for L'Islet (Mr. Deehene) and by the Minister of Agriculture (Hon. Mr. Tolmie) that though grading is important, it is perhaps not the most important step to take at this time. Suppose a certain quantity of butter has been graded, some of it No. 1 and some No. 2, and that no restriction has been imposed or regulation made governing the limit of time during which tftese products shall be held in warehouses before they are exported. If such a highly perishable product as butter, graded No. 1 and No. 2, is held in warehouse in Montreal for a number of months, it is likely that even the No. 1 grade will have deteriorated considerably by the time it reaches Liverpool, and the impression will prevail among retailers in England that our butter graded No. 1 is far from attaining the quality that one would expect of a product so graded. This is an objection which I think should be seriously considered by the Minister if he really desires to consider the question carefully.


Hoh. Mr. TOLMIE:: 
Henri Sévérin Béland: I thank the minister for this further explanation; it is indeed very reassuring. The. loss of money sustained by. the farmers through the sale of an inferior product is certainly substantial. I do not remember what the loss was in the case of Ontario for butter, or in the case of Quebec for cheese. But whatever that loss is, the loss of reputation is greater. It is with dairy produce as it is with the 
human being. A carefully built up reputation, characterized' by good moral conduct, thrift and honesty, will, through some dishonourable act, disappear in a moment; and whatever may be the virtues and the attainments of the man who has so dishonoured himself, it takes him months and even years to regain his lost reputation. So it is in the case of cheese and butter; if Canada loses her reputation in the English market for the production of high-class dairy products, it will take years to regain it. So I say that loss of reputation is a more .serious consideration than the loss of money that we are sustaining.
We have very keen competitors in the English market. My hon. friend has referred to the fact that Denmark is recognized on the English market as the best producer of butter. There are many reasons why that is so. One is that the Danish authorities keep in close touch with the producers of butter in that country. But another reason for the superiority of Danish butter is found in the particularly fine quality of the grass, and in the race to reach first place in the production of high class butter, that is a condition which we in this country cannot overcome. The important point is that our dairy products. should be without fault, in colour, aroma, taste, consistence, and also packing. It is really a campaign of national importance that should impress itself upon the mind of every hon. gentleman -who has a seat in this House, and all hon members who represent rural constituencies should, during the recess, impress upon the dairy-farmers of Ontario and Quebec the imperative necessity of maintaining the reputation they enjoy in the English market. Hundreds of millions of dollars are at stake, and 1 hope the minister, who appears so well disposed in regard to this matter and who has to-day delivered his maiden speech as a minister, will give his most earnest attention to this great problem, these great staple, necessary articles of food, namely, cheese and butter.
The matter of proscribing from our market oleomargarine is a very delicate subject. The hon. member for Frontenac (Mr. Edwards) is, I believe, of the opinion that we should prohibit the importation, manufacture, and sale of oleomargarine as was the case before 1917.


Mr. EDWARDS:: Absolutely.


Henri Sévérin Béland: Is it .advisable that we
should do that? Since 1917 the importation,, manufacture, and sale of oleomargarine has

been permitted, but as a result of that permission, do we find that the farmers have been receiving a lower price than before for their dairy products? I do not believe they have. Butter sells to-day higher than it did before 1917; cheese sells to-day higher than it did before 1917.


William Cameron Edwards: So does, oleomargarine.


Henri Sévérin Béland: If the average. farmer
were consulted, if the question were presented to him in this light, namely: "poor families in this country cannot afford to pay 75 cents for a pound of fat under the name of butter, but they can afford to buy a pound of fat under the name of oleomargarine for 45 cents; by prohibiting the sale of oleomargarine, are we going to deprive poor families from enjoying some fat on their table"? What reply would he give? That'Is a very delicate question. I know that -a large body of the farming community in this country is in favour of prosdribing the use of oleomargarine in Canada; but taking into consideration the fact that the farmers are selling their dairy products at a higher price than when oleomargarine was prohibited, I think that for a time at least we should permit the use of oleomargarine in Canada.
I did not intend to detain the House so long. I thank-the hon. gentleman who represents the riding of Frontenac for bringing this important subject before the House, and I am sure we are all thankful to him for the large quantity of valuable statistics he has given us upon this important subject.


Mr. JAMES ALEXANDER ROBB (Cha-teauguay-Huntingdon) :: Mr. Speaker, before the hon. member for Frontenac (Mr. Edwards) closes the debate, I wish just briefly to call to the attention of the House and more particularly of the Government another feature of the dairy industry than that presented this afternoon by the hon. member who has given evidence of having studied the question of inspection, not only in Canada, but in other countries. I rise to speak more particularly on account of the statement just made by the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Tolmie) who, speaking for the Government, said that the Government were desirous in every way of doing everything possible to encourage the dairy industry of this country. The minister admitted the figures presented this afternoon by the hon. member for Frontenac as showing that the dairy industry of Canada was one of the largest industries of this country, and that much of the future prosperity of
Canada depended upon the dairy industry. When my hon. friend said that, it occurred to me that what waa required in this country at the present time was not so much a provision for inspection of dairy products as methods of providing for the production of dairy products. For if conditions are going to be continued as they have been during the past two years, the dairy industry of this country will be ruined, and ruined by this Government. We have, sitting alongside of the Minister of Agriculture, the Minister of Trade and Commerce, the acting Prime Minister (Sir George Foster), who has in his department two boards of control, each of which is doing all that it possibly can do to destroy the dairy industry of this country. On the one hand we have the Board of Commerce threatening to put farmers in jail if they increase the price of milk to the basis of what it is worth in export countries. That is on record; every hon. member acknowledges that the Board of Commerce, sitting at Hamilton, have, if they are correctly reported in the newspapers, threatened to put farmers in jail if they increase the price of milk. On the other hand vre have the Wheat Control Board who not only take upon themselves to fix the price of wheat, but determine that if the millers of this country manufacture flour for export, they shall pay into the coffers of the Wheat Control Board a tax of $2 a barrel,-for export to some countries this has been reduced to $1.50 a barrel-and if the millers will not pay that $1.50 or $2 a barrel, the Wheat Control . Board will not allow them to export flour.
The consequence is that to-day the sheds in Montreal and St. John, N.B. are piled up with flour that cannot be exported because the markets will not stand the $1.50 or $2 per barrel ta* that is demanded, and the large mills are shut down. It is not a question of setting a price for dairy feed for cattle to-day; it is a question of getting feed; there is no feed obtainable, because the mills are not running. If the Government are desirous of encouraging the dairy industry of this country, one thing they must do is to call off the man who threatens to put in jail the farmer who rises early to _ milk cows, and the other thing they must do is to take hold of this Wheat Control Board and say to them, that no matter how much they may preach protection or try to make the people of this country believe that they are in favour of taxes, they must take off the taxes if the milling industry of this country is not to

be ruined, and along with it the dairying industry of this country, because primarily you must have cheap and good feed for your cattle if you are going to produce milk. You may pass legislation to fix the price of milk and of the feed that goes to the cattle, bu+ you cannot pass legislation that will compel a farmer to milk cows unless he is going to make a profit. So I submit that if the Government are desirous of helping the dairying industry of this country they must do something to enable the farmers of Canada to get cheaper feed .for their dairy cattle.
At six o'clock the House took recess.
After Recess.
The House resumed at eight o'clock.
Mr. ROBERT H. HALBERT (North Ontario) : When I rose before recess I had no intention of making a lengthy address on this subject, and I see no reason why I should do so. I was greatly pleased at the able manner in which the hon. member for Frontenac (Mr. Edwards) discharged his duty this afternoon in moving the resolution, and the matter of his address was excedingly interesting. I am sure it must have proved instructive to all hon. members who heard it. In my opinion butter should be graded before going into cold storage as well as after coming out. It was this opinion which I desired pre-eminently to express when I rose this afternoon, and incidentally I intended to say that the farmers do not ask for protection. With regard to oleomargarine, the manufacturers tell us that it is something which is intended to benefit the poor. _Well, anything that is intended to help the poor will help the farmers; they belong'to that class. Let me say, however, that if oleomargarine were really a product for the poor man it could be put on the market in a much cheaper way than it is at present. It is put up in very expensive cases, two-coloured papers, and beautifully engrossed boxes, and is extensively advertised at great cost, all of which facts seem to indicate that the manufacturers are trying to make a profit out of this article which they would have us believe has been established as a sort of charitable institution. I think it should be made an offence to mention the word "butter," in any connection, in the advertising of oleomargarine, which should be so1 entirely on its merits and writh no allusion to butter either directly or indirectly.


Mr. JAMES McISAAC (King's, P.E.I.):: 1 did not intend to participate in the discussion of this important question, but the admirable manner in which the resolution has been presented by the hon. member for Frontenac (Mr. Edwards) has aroused in me, as I am sure it must have aroused in others, a very great interest in the subject. The hon. member has given to the House an amount of statistical information so extensive and valuable that it seems to me it is of the greatest importance that it should be placed on the record of the proceedings. I was also impelled to rise to my feet in consideration of the statement which the hon. member made in the course of his remarks that the province from which I come-Prince Edward Island-was a close second to the great province of Ontario in the perfection of cheese manufacture. It was a matter of gratification and pride to me to hear the hon. member say that the cheese of Prince Edward Island graded ninety per cent, or a little over, and I take this opportunity of expressing my sincere thanks to that hon. gentleman and, at the same time, of putting on the record of this House an expression of real gratification at the fact that the smallest province of Confederation stands next to the greatest province, or at least one of the greatest provinces, in the matter of cheese-making. However, in regard to the hon. member's reference to oleomargarine, I do not think I can agree with him. I do not know that I have tasted oleomargarine, or at least, if I have, I must have done so unwittingly. It is said that this substance can be made to look so much like butter and, by means, of flavouring, to taste so much like it that it is sometimes difficult to discover the difference. I do not know much about its manufacture, but I would say that, under our prersent conditions, when the prices of all commodities are so exceedingly high, it would be hardly fair to prevent the poorer classes of people, who might not be able to supply themselves with butter, from obtaining a substitute -which is reputed to be perfectly good. I am informed that, properly- manufactured, there is nothing deleterious or injurious in the elements that enter into oleomargarine, and for that reason I think that, for the time being at least, those who cannot - afford butter might be permitted to buy this substitute. As has been remarked, it would scarcely have any material effect upon the price of butter in the market, especially at the present time; and it has been shown that even formerly, when it was probably

manufactured to a greater degree than it is now and prices were not so high, it was not known materially to affect the price of butter in the open market. I was very much pleased with the statement of the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Tolmie) that it was the intention of the Government to take proper steps in the matter of inspection, and in every other way to guard the purity and good condition of our butter and cheese intended for export, not only at the port of shipment but in transit, so that these products would be carefully looked after until by the officers and employees of the department they were absolutely on the market. That seems to me to give us a safe guarantee that this matter will be zealously looked after. As the minister remarked it will take some little time to bring this system to the greatest degree of perfection, but it is certain that everything that can possibly be done to safeguard the interests of our butter and cheese producers will be done. Before I take my seat I desire to say one word more. The debate was undoubtedly on a high level and was moderate in every way, and free from anything partisan, until the hon. member for Chateauguay-Huntingdon (Mr. Robb) rose to speak. I regret to say, however, that he was unable to let the occasion pass without injecting a partisan spirit. He threw the virus of party bias into the debate in order, I presume, to have a crack at the Government. It seemed to me that his endeavour to connect the present subject with the Wheat Board and milling and other things was very far-fetched, and the hon. gentleman must have had considerable difficulty in bringing his remarks on those matters to bear upon the subject under discussion. I would not be so ungenerous as to suggest that there might be some thing other than the public good, perhaps a mere personal motive, that impelled the hon. member to wander so far afield, but I do think he could with great propriety have confined his remarks more strictly to the question before the House. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, let me once again express my gratification at the statement which fell from the lips of the hon. member for Fron-tenac that the province from which I have the honour to come has taken such a high place in the cheese manufacturing of Canada.


Oliver Robert Gould: I am not sure that volume of words will add anything to the merit of the question or will enhance' the able presentation of the subject made by the hon. member for Frontenac (Mr. Edwards), and it is not my intention to
discuss the question in all its details. Its subject matter is not of such great importance in the Western Provinces as it is in the Eastern and Maritime Provinces. Nevertheless, it is a fact that the people who Jive on the western plains are annually paying more attention to the dairying industry, and we believe that in the very near future this industry will assume such proportions as will justify its further expansion. However, the fact remains that the provincial governments of the Western Provinces, realizing that the industry is in its initial stage in that part of the country are adopting short courses with the direct object of improving the product of the factories and creameries along the lines suggested this afternoon by the hon. member for Frontenac. They felt that it was the duty _of the Dominion Government to assist in this work, but short courses are being held and everything possible is being done in a provincial way to make the product of our creameries of a high standard. The large exports of the products of the creameries and factories from the West does not of necessity come' East to find a market. It is a fact-which I know, because I have had first-hand knowledge of it-that the Saskatchewan creameries last year in a test case sent, early in the season, a carload of butter south of the international boundary line, and I may say that when the returns came my cream check showed two cents per pound of an increase in the price of butter fat. That may be due to a deeper appreciation of the merit of our product by the people south of the international boundary, or it may be the outcome of the educational campaign carried on by the provinces.
It seems to me that largely the question can be arranged or else a solution can be found by the competition which must, and does, of necessity, exist among the various provinces. I (have with me a clipping that I took from a paper since hearing the ad-[DOT] dress of the hon. gentleman this afternoon, and (while he claims everything for the province of Quebec, while hon. members who represent the various districts of that province were very much gratified, while I was very much pleased also, and while I do not want to bring in the statement that I am now about to make to take any of the pleasure away from these hon. gentlemen, the clipping that I .hold in my hand declares that the province of Alberta has already taken the lead in the meritorious pro-

duet of its creameries. I am not going to treat that point in an argumentative way, but I refer to it as proof of the assertion that the provinces are on a competitive basis in this regard. I believe that hearty co-operation between the Dominion and provincial authorities will do much to overcome the difficulties as they have been presented to us this afternoon in the able address of the hon. member for Frontenac. I as an agriculturist wish to record my *sympathy with the thoughts and ideas that were presented, and that is mainly the *reason why I have risen to my feet to address a few words to the House. I want to *suggest to these hon. gentlemen that it is - because I am in sympathy with them that I am on my feet at this moment. Some day I will perhaps rise to my feet again *and want some reciprocity from them in the *form of sympathetic consideration for some suggestions of my own. We are extending our hands across the prairies to the Eastern Provinces. That is the position we are taking, and I hope these hon. gentlemen will be equalty ready to extend a friendly hand to the West. The province of Alberta has already done a great deal to promote the dairying industry, and the ideas and suggestions that have proved so successful *there are now being put in operation in the (province of Saskatchewan. They are continuing their educational courses and trying to bring about a movement among the creamery operators which will Tesult in uniformity of product. The same thing applies to the province of Manitoba. All the Western Provinces, I am sure, will be very willing to co-operate. You will find no *antagonism from the Western Provinces, but on the contrary they will be willing to enter into hearty co-operation with all the provinces for a Dominion-wide campaign to make the products of our creameries and *cheese factories better than they have been *in the past, uniform and of such high *quality that the label which they bear will be the symbol of merit.


John Hampden Burnham: Mr. Speaker, as there are a number of farmers in my riding, and as they have been more or less exercised over the question of oleomargarine, I wish to say that I thank the hon. member for Assini-*boia (Mr. Gould) and the 'hon. member for North Ontario (Mr. Halbert), who is, or at *any rate was until recently, the 'head of the United Farmers of Ontario, for substantially, or indirectly, agreeing with the statement that oleomargarine is a fit and proper
[Mr. Gould.1
product, and something that may be allowed to go upon the open market in Canada. The people cannot pay the price of butter as it is at the present time, but they can pay the price of oleomargarine, and, of course, bon. gentlemen are aware, the process of *making oleomargarine is improving from day to day. It costs just now 45 cents a pound, but -it- is said that the price will be 30 cents in a short time; and whilst it is made of various animal and vegetable fats and vegetable oils, the people generally are fed on a reliable product in oleomargarine: The food constituents are such as to make it in every sense a most desirable product. Therefore, when iwe read, as we have been *doing, that South Africa is giving up its dairy farming in favour of producing oleomargarine, and that more scientific machinery than has been used heretofore in the production of margarine is turning out a *cheaper and a better article, we can very well understand that the remarks of the farmers' party to-night through two of their illustrious representatives, the member for Assiniboia and the member for North Ontario, indicate not only a broad and generous spirit, but that they are desirous that oleomargarine shall come in, no matter what any farmer may say. I think that is a sufficient Teply to the objections raised by the farmers in Canada. Of course, in farming matters and matters of this kind, I will have to take my cue from those who know *best, and I shall be in future an earnest champion of oleomargarine-the cheaper the *better. It may be a serious detriment to butter, but of course these gentlemen do not care anything about that. They have been *assuring us for some time that they want *to see the price of foodstuffs come down, but they told us the other day that if the eight-hour day were adopted the prices of food would rise. Of course they want the price *of food, and especially of butter, to come down, they have endorsed oleomargarine and they have made every legislator in this country feel that he had a right to vote for oleomargarine, as he will vote for it. We thank the farmers' party for having made *oleomargarine a competitor on -the Canadian market and recognizing it as a most *desirable food for the Canadian people.


Mr. GEOROE BOYCE (Carleton):: Mr. Speaker, it gave me a very great deal of pleasure to hear the able address, of the hon. member for Frontenac (Mr. Edwards), the hon. the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Tolmie) and the other hon. gentlemen who spoke in regard to that very important in-

dustry of our Dominion, that is the production of butter and cheese. When we look at the returns we see that the Dominion produces in the neighbourhood of $250,000,000 worth of these commodities not taking into account the very large amount that is used by the producers. The industry must then be looked upon as taking a very high place in the productive activities of our Dominion. It has been said by some that the trade in oleomargarine is not antagonistic to the dairy industry. As far as I am concerned I spoke upon that question last year and I think that I will not repeat what I said then. What I did say was not very favourable, to oleomargarine but I have kept a very careful watch and I have not heard of anybody dying or being sick from use of it; therefore, I do not think that^it should be condemned. I heard some hon. gentlemen saying that they could almost do away with butter. Well, supposing they did do away with butter, what about the cheese? Would not our agriculture be in a very serious condition then, because there is no question that the farmer who has a good herd of dairy cattle will produce from fifty to one hundred per cent more than the farmer who has no cattle or very few on his farm. I do not think that I would have spoken to-night but for the fact that I occupy the proud position of representing a county which stands second in the production of cheese in this Dominion of Canada. Therefore I could not let the occasion pass without expressing myself with regard to the benefit that is to be derived by agriculture from this industry. As we are well aware a farm conducted as a dairy farm, increases soil fertility and adds greatly to all kinds of agriculture production.


William Cameron Edwards: Air. Speaker, the manner in which this resolution has been received generally by hon. members on this side of the House has given me no more .gratification than the reception it met with from hon. gentlemen on the other side. It is a unique experience for me to have any *of my suggestions received in such a friendly spirit by hon. gentlemen opposite.


Jacques Bureau: When you are friendly
we are all friendly.


Mr. COPP:: We are improving all the
time.


William Cameron Edwards: It is an experience
which I shall not soon forget. I may say, 'Sir, that my gratification at the manner in which the resolution has been received by hon. members to your right and to your 39
left was somewhat dampened just before the House rose at six o'clock by the attitude of those hon. members who occupy the " cross benches." Indeed, I was surprised and not a littled pained to notice that the God-chosened representatives, of the agri* culturists of the Dominion should be so conspicuous this afternoon by their absence when a matter of so much interest and importance to our farmers was under consideration. My sorrow in that respect, of course, was somewhat lessened by the late arrival on the scene of the hon. member for North Ontario (Mr. Halbert) who, Sir, you might have noticed, just previous to six o'clock was manifesting some physical uneasiness, which I did not know whether to attribute to a desire on his part to speak or to absent himself from the Ohamber. However, before six o'clock the hon. gentleman set all our doubts at rest by taking the floor and giving us a very interesting, though exceedingly brief, address.
There are only one or two things for me to notice in the remarks made by the hon. member for North Ontario. He told us that the farmers did not want any protection. Then he proceeded to give his sanction to tlie manufacture and importation of oleomargarine, but he added that in his opinion those interested in the sale of oleomargarine should be rigorously prohibited from using the word " batter " in their advertisements. That, I might point out to the hon. gentleman is obviously asking for protection along a certain line. One might conclude that the hon. gentleman, even though declaring himself an out-and-out free trader and averse to having anything to do with protection, still, like many others on that side of the House, and especially those who occupy the cross benches and are known as the Agrarian group or the National Progressive party, still clings to the idea of some form of protection.
The hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Gould) was good enough to give his approval of the general terms of my resolution. But he thought that the very fact that he had been so kind was something which should call for a. quid pro quo from me on some later occasion. In effect, the hon. gentleman said, " I am supporting your resolution, and I hope the time will come when you will not forget that and will support some of the things which I shall advocate in this House." I may say at once to the hon. gentleman that I very keenly appreciate his support, and I can assure him that if during the present or at any later session he brings down any matter which is as worthy of endorsation as



that which I have brought to the attention of the House, I shall be very pleased to give it my support. The hon. gentleman and the party to which he belongs have made it somewhat difficult for me or any other member, except those who occupy seats alongside him, to follow him and his party in anything which they may introduce. He and his friends have organized what they claim to be a superior party with a superior platform.


Jacques Bureau: A super-party.


William Cameron Edwards: It does seem to me, Sir, that those hon. gentlemen have made this great mistake-and I believe they will become aware of it in the course of time- that they really have fashioned a god in their own image, and while they believe they are adoring that god they are in reality adoring themselves. I am glad to have the endorsation of these hon. gentlemen, and I hope -that their participation in this debate-two of them have given my resolution their approval-is an indication that in time to come-for the rest of the session maybe-they will manifest that independence of everything savouring of party, which they have declared from the housetops to be the cardinal principle of their belief. If, for instance, we should have a debate on the eight-hour day, I would expect these chosen prophets from the agricultural districts not to absent themselves nor to keep absolutely silent as they did when the question was before this_ House the other day-and no question affects our farmers more-but to rise in their place, almost fighting for an opportunity to raise their voice against the introduction of any legislation to promote an eight-hour day. Because, whatever may be the opinions of farmers in regard to oleomargarine and many- other things, there is not any doubt in my mind, Sir, that the vast majority of them would express, themselves as against an eight-hour day.
I can understand, of course, the difficulty that these hon.-gentlemen experience in taking a course like that, because it has been part of their platform, part of their .policy, to link themselves up with labour in this country and they naturally feel diffident about saying anything which might turn aside from their party those of the labour group. In that respect these hon. gentlemen are showing some of the elements of political-would I be in order, Mr. Speaker, if I used the word "trickery?" It is the only word that occurs to my mind at the moment.
Mr. McMtASTER:	Sagacity. '


William Cameron Edwards: Sagacity-I thank my
hon. friend. There is no limit to his vocabulary; that is a better word than the one which suggested itself to me. These hon. gentlemen have manifested some signs of possessing political sagacity, notwithstand

ing the fact that they tell us that they as a group will have nothing whatever to do with the old political parties; that party politics is something which is abhorent to them.
I wish to devote a little attention to the remarks of my genial friend from Chateau-guay-Huntingdon (Mr. Robb) who occupies the important post of Chief Whip of His Majesty's loyal Opposition. I suppose that he sometimes feels impelled to take upon himself the burdens of the whole party on that side of the House and exercise his privilege as Chief Opposition Whip by cracking the whip around the shoulders of the Government whenever he can get an opportunity of doing so. I have no objection to the hon. gentleman exercising himself along that line, but I wish to direct one or two things to his attention. The hon. gentleman made the statement-which I may be pardoned for thinking was a little extravagant-that the dairy industry of this country would be ruined by the course which the' Government had been taking. The hon. gentleman wished to leave the improssion that the farmers were being, and had been, neglected by this Government; that their interests were not being properly looked after. May I direct his attention to the fact that in 1912 an Agricultural Aid Bill was put through providing for the appropriation of half a million dollars to assist the provincial departments of Agriculture in extending and carrying on their work; that in the next year an appropriation of $10,000,000 was voted to be spread over a period of ten years under the Agricultural Instruction Act, and that in the first four years during which that Act Was operative my hon. friend's province [DOT] drew from the Dominion Treasury for agricultural purposes over $800,000 and Ontario over $900,000? That has been added to somewhat since. May I direct his attention also to the aid which was given by this Government to veterinary colleges by a grants of $20,000 a year? May I summarize by pointing out that from 1905 to 1911 the total aid granted to agriculture by the federal Parliament amounted to $6,-
930,000	or an average of $1,155,000 a year, while between 1911 and 1917 the total amount granted by this Government to aid agriculture throughout the Dominion

amounted to over $19,000,000, an average of over $3,171,000? I merely direct attention to these figures in order to show the hon. member that if the grants to agriculture are to be taken as a criterion, then the hon. gentleman is not the person to complain of any lack of interest on the part of the Government which has been in power for the last six. or seven years.
I wish to refer also to my hon. friend's statement in regard to milk and the alleged threat that the farmers would be put in jail if they raised the price of that commodity. I am not here to defend the Board of Commerce; in fact, Mr. Speaker, I may candidly tell you I do not feel any inclination to defend it. But in regard to fixing the price of milk, I may say that the price agreed upon was suggested by Mr. Stonehouse, President of the Milk Producers' Association, and that that price is very much higher than tlje price which the U.F.O.-Labour Government at present in power in Toronto are paying to the farmers down in my district for milk which they supply to the provincial institutions. Would my friends who comprise the group of prophets on the cross benches, the agrarian group, those who have laid upon their shoulders the burden of specially looking after the interests of farmers-would they address an appeal to Premier Drury, asserting that, in their opinion as farmers and as the special representatives of that particular class of our population it is a crying shame that the farmer Government of Ontario is paying the farmers in my county less for the milk supplied to the provincial institutions than the price fixed by the 'Board of Commerce in Toronto and against which the U.F.O. members of this House and of the Toronto House directed a tirade of abuse? Now, here is an opportunity for them'* to show their particular interest in agriculture I trust that they will show it, and show it not as they did when the discussion came up on the eight-hour day- by keeping absolutely silent, but by communicating their views on the subject to the Government at Toronto which is abusing the farmer so shamefully in the matter of the price they are paying for the milk supplied to provincial institutions.
As to the further remarks made by the member for Chateauguay-Huntingdon, without taking the time to go into the details I would say that the lack of credit and the rate of exchange are a fair, full and sufficient answer to the criticism which he offers.
The member for Beauce (Mr. Beland) and the member for East Middlesex (Mr. Glass), very properly remarked that if butter was graded and then kept in storage for six or eight months it would be apt to be off colour [DOT] or below grade, and that that was an argument against grading. I agree with the hon. gentlemen who have so expressed themselves. My idea is that the grading of butter which is destined for export should take place not. six or eight or ten months before it is shipped, but only a few days before it is placed on the boat., That is what is done in New Zealand. I recognize that we are a different country from New/ Zealand or Denmark or Holland. Theser are small countries which we could tuck away in one corner of any of our provipces and never know they were there. We have a large country, a great extent of territory and I recognize the difficulties that will face us when we attempt to grade our export butter and cheese.
Most of that export will go through the port of Montreal, but I believe-and I am confirmed in my belief by what I heard at a meeting of the Deputy Ministers from the various provinces held at the 'Chateau Laurier last week-that the departments of Agriculture of the different provinces can work in harmony with the Department of Agriculture of the-Dominion of Canada, and I believe there is a spirit that will enable them to work. harmoniously together. _I think the provinces should take up as their * special work the grading of butter-I mention butter particularly-for home consumption, and that they should work in conjunction with the Federal Department which should assume the responsibility of grading anything that goes overseas. If the differ- [DOT] ent provinces undertook to grade the butter produced in the creameries in those provinces, qualified men being appointed to do the grading, just as the man who would do the grading at Montreal would be a qualified man, I do not think there would be much difficulty about deterioration. In the first plaGe, I am informed by the Chief Dairy Commissioner, who is a practical man and a man who has given a great deal of time and thought to this work, that butter which grades No. 1 is not very apt to deteriorate. He told me at six o'clock that some time ago he tested some butter in the city of Winnipeg which had been kept a year and a half and it was perfectly sound and! sweet. I will grant you-and this is easily understandable-that butter grading No. 2;. No. 3 and lower, will very easily deteriorate;, but butter which grades No. 1 will not easily


Mr.  J. A. MJAECARG@Maple Creek: Mr. Speaker, if I have the privilege I should like to put ,my hon. friend right on a statement he made with reference to the crossbenchers.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I am afraid the hon. gentleman would not be in order. He has not spoken himself. He could correct, by a personal explanation, any statement that had been made about him, blit certainly cannot make an explanation as representing the party.
Resolution withdrawn.



UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS.

Henri Sévérin Béland: For a copy of the report made by the Board of Railway Commissioners for Canada on the application of the Canadian Pacific and Grand Trunk Railway Companies on behalf of themselves and other railways carrying His Majesty's mail in Canada asking that fair and reason-ble rates be fixed by the board for the carriage of mails pursuant to the reference of the matter to the board by Order in Council P.C. 617, dated March 7, 1917, for the determination as to the accuracy or inaccuracy of the claim made by the railway companies, that these rates are inadequate, and, if it is found that the present rates are inadequate to determine as the result of evidence to be submitted by the Post Office Department and the railway companies interested what would be a fair rate of payment for the service. Also a copy of all correspondence between members of the Government or any officials thereof and the Board of Railway Commissioners or any officials thereof in reference to the report mentioned above.


Mr. FIELDING:: For a return showing the cases in which, from October 1, 1896, to the present, in the computation of superannuation allowances to retiring officials, .additional years were allowed under the provisions of Section 12 of Chapter 7, R.S., the dates of the granting of the allowances, the names of the officials and the number of years added to the actual service; along with a copy of all Treasury Board Reports and Orders in' Council relating to such cases.


William Stevens Fielding: For a copy of the Orders in Council of December 1, 1919, and December 9, 1919, respecting ratification of the treaties and conventions laid before the House of Commons on Monday, March 1, 1920.



RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF SOLDIERS.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. NEWTON W. ROWELL (President of the Privy Council) moved:
That a Special Committee be appointed to consider the question of continuing the War Bonus now being paid to pensioners under the existing pension law. and any amendments to the law which may be proposed or may be considered necessary by the Committee, and to report the result to 'the House; with power

to call for persons, papers and records, to examine witnesses under oath, and to report from time to time; and that Rule No. 11 be suspended in relation thereto.
He said: In moving this resolution, Mr. Speaker, I may say that it is not the view of the Government that the Pensions Committee this year should be called upon to review our whole pensions legislation as it has been called upon to review that legislation during the last two years. L believe that we now have a pension law which both in its scope and, in its general provisions, is an admirable one, and that therefore the work of the pension committee this year will be much less onerous than it has been in the past. While there is no restriction on the matters which the committee may properly consider in the motion I have submitted to the House, I think the important matters which the committee may be called upon to consider will he limited in number.
The first is the one suggested in the resolution, namely, the continuation of the war bonus which was granted by the legislation of last session. Hon. members will recall that a bonus of twenty per cent was added to the total disability and partial disability pensions and to the pensions to widows, should this be continued, extended or otherwise modified. This pensions committee will also be called upon to consider the matter brought to the attention of the House last week by the hejn. member for South Quebec (Mr. Power), supported by the hon. member for London (Mr. Cronyn), as to whether, in computing pensions for widowed mothers, the amount of their income from other sources should be taken into account. That is a subject which the pensions committee will be asked to consider. Another matter of very considerable moment-and I mention it so that hon. members may give it some consideration- is the question whether the Board of Pensions Commissioners should be authorized to commute the pensions of those suffering from disability less than twenty per cent. When the disability is less than twenty per cent the pension is necessarily of a rather limited amount, payable monthly or quarterly as the case may be, and the payments are not large. It so happens, however, that more than fifty per cent of the total number of pensions is of this class, and it is estimated that the administrative staff might be very substantially reduced if the smaller -pensions were commuted. In fact, the- Board of Pension .Commissioners estimate "that a reduction in the expenses of administration to the amount of not less

than $300,000 a year might be made if these pensions were commuted. It is a question ' that will go to the pensions committee for its consideration, but hon. members will see that it is an important one from the standpoint of administration.
Mr.   BBLAND@: Most of the employees are returned soldiers, are they not?


Newton Wesley Rowell: The employees on the staff are returned soldiers, but hon. members will see from the estimates before the House that- the cost of administering our pensions is a very substantial annual charge upon the revenues. I do not say that the committee should agree to this; I simply throw it out as an important matter which I think they should consider.
There is-a fourth question which was brought to the ' attention of the House by the hon. member for Skeena (Mr. Peck), and that is, whether or not the pensions to the widows at the present time are adequate. That is a proper matter for the consideration of the Pensions Committee.
I think that probably these matters I have enumerated wrill constitute the most important questions -which will come before the Pensions Committee this year for consideration, but the resolution is broad enough to cover any question which any member of the Pensions Committee may think should be considered by way of an amendment to the existing law,, and any matter that may be brought to the attention of the committee for their consideration by any hon. member of the House or any other parties interested in the subject.


Henri Sévérin Béland: Has the minister any idea how many members will compose the committee?


Newton Wesley Rowell: The committee will comprise the following members :	Messrs.
Arthurs, Beland, Bqlton, Brien, Caldwell, Clark (Bruce), Cronyn, Devlin, Fontaine, Green, Lang, MacNutt, McCurdy, Mc-Gibbon (Muskoka), Nesbitt, Peck, Pacaud, Pardee, Power, Redman, Ross, Rowell, Savard, and Sutherland.


Henri Sévérin Béland: That is a somewhat
smaller committee than the last.


Newton Wesley Rowell: I think it is the same size as the committee of last year.


Mr. MAHARG:: Will the scope of the committee be broad enough to include members of the Royal Northwest Mounted Police who are now drawing pensions?


Newton Wesley Rowell: No. This committee relates to pensions for the Canadian Expeditionary Force only. That was the purpose for which the committee was appointed in the past. It will deal only with soldiers.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Newton Wesley Rowell: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move:
That a Special Committee be appointed in conformity with the resolution agreed to by the House this day to consider the question of continuing the war bonus now being paid to pensioners under the existing pension law, and any amendments to the law which may be proposed or may be considered necessary by the committee, to consist of the following members : Messrs. Arthurs, Boland, Bolton, Brien, Caldwell, Clark (Bruce), Cronyn, Devlin, Fontaine,. Green, Dang, MacNutt, McCurdy, McGibbon (Muskoka), Nesbitt, Peck, Pacaud, Pardee, Power, Redman, Ross, Rowell, Savard, and Sutherland.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
On motion of Sir Henry Drayton, the House went into Committee on the following proposed resolution, Mr. Boivin in the Chair:
Resolved, that it is expedient to amend section two of the Ottawa Mint Act, Chapter twenty-six of the Revised Statutes, 190-6, as enacted by Chapter thirty-one of the Statutes of -1'9-13, by providing that the yearly payment (for defraying the salaries, contingencies, retiring and ' other allowances and expenses connected with the maintenance of the Ottawa (Branch of the Royal Mint and of the refinery [DOT]forming part thereof, -be increased from one hundred and ten thousand dollars to two hundred thousand dollars.
William Stevens Fielding: Will the minister
kindly explain?


Henry Lumley Drayton: Mr. Chairman, our work in the Mint is somewhat different from ordinary governmental activities. The arrangements under which the Mint is operated in Ottawa -were made by the hon. member for Shelburne and Queen's (Mr. Fielding) in 1906. The. Canadian Mint is a branch of the Royal Mint. It is subject to the rules of the Royal Mint. The Royal Mint appoints the officers *and does everything which is necessary to be done in order to keep up the high standard of its operations, and is responsible for these operations. We pay for the operations, but we get all the resulting profits from the Mint. There is a yearly payment by Canada -to the royal commissioners of the Mint. In 1906 that annual payment was $75,000, -and in 1913 it had risen to $110,000. The cost of the Mint has not been carried by the *annual payment. The commissioners now ' desire that instead of supplementary votes

*being brought in from time to time, the *spirit of the first arrangement should be carried out; that the annual grant made under the statute towards the Mint should 'be continued and that the amount should be increased to what would fairly represent the present activities of the Mint. The proposition is to raise it to the sum of $200,000. The business of the Mint has very greatly increased. When the annuity was raised in 1913 to $110,000 the coins produced by the Mint numbered 17,668,978, while the coins produced in 1919 numbered 35,986,003. The output has more than doubled and the expenses, of course, are creeping up. One further, thing that I should call to the attention of the Committee is that unless the amount of the annuity is absolutely required by the royal commissioners of the Mint on (Canada's account the expenditure is not made. In addition to the coins which were *milled for Canada's purposes, the Committee may be interested in knowing in 1918 the Canadian Mint produced for the Royal Mint 4,435,000 shilling blanks, while in 1919 the Mint milled for the Royal Mint 1,566,340 blanks. The Mint is one of the few things which really pay. Of course it is not run directly for the purposes of gain, but as a matter of fact from the year 1908 to the end of last year the excess of receipts over expenditures amounted to $6,624,354.44.


William Stevens Fielding: It is a mere matter of accounting. We have to provide for the cost of the Mint and in view of its largely increased operations it is but reasonable to provide for an increased expenditure. At the time that the Mint was established there were some obvious advantages in having it as a branch of the Royal Mint so that the Canadian Mint might expect to be in a position to do minting work for other parts of the Empire. At that time it was thought that probably there would not be enough work to keep the Mint entirely employed on Canadian currency. I think the arrangements that were made for the Royal Mint have proven entirely satisfactory. One result of making this a branch of the Royal Mint was that we had the experience of the men who had been engaged in this work. I suppose we gave up a little bit of what is called patronage, although we are told that patronage has now been abolished. We have nothing to do, practically speaking, with the appointment of the officials; that is done under the direction of the authorities of the Royal Mint in England. Of course, as I said, this is a mere matter of accounting. If the operations of the Mint

do not call for this larger sum, as the minister says, it will not be paid. The Mint, however, is a source of profit and whatever profit there is goes not to the Royal Mint but to the Government of Canada. I think the minister has given good reasons why this resolution should be adopted.


Henri Sévérin Béland: Do I understand that the only privilege we have in connection with the Royal Mint is to pay the salaries? Do we appoint the employees?


Henry Lumley Drayton: Our privileges up to date might be covered by the result I have just mentioned-profits to the amount of $6,600,000.


Henri Sévérin Béland: But this last year we have been operating the Mint at a loss?


Henry Lumley Drayton: No.


Henri Sévérin Béland: I thought I heard the statement made the other day by the minister.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Yes, but we stopped that. The country would have been operating the Mint at a loss having regard ' to the silver coinage. We had contracts for the supply of silver which ran us over a very considerable period of the high silver price so that we were able to mint it at a profit. When we had to buy dear silver we reduced the silver content.


William Stevens Fielding: My hon. friend front Beauce (Mr. Beland) will see that we not only have the privilege of paying but we also have the privilege of gathering in the profit.
Resolution reported.
Sir HENRY DRAYTON moved for' leave to introduce Bill No. 30 to amend the Ottawa Mint Act.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.
On motion of Hon. Mr. Burrell the House went into Committee to consider the following resolution:
Resolved, That it is expedient that section one hundred and twenty-seven of the The Customs Act, chapter forty-eight of the Revised Statutes, which provides that fire-arms and munitions of war shall not be imported except from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland unless upon application to and permission given by the Minister, be amended by- striking out the exception in favour of the United Kingdom; and, further, that a clerical error in section twj hundred and sixty-four of the said Act be corrected by inserting the word "or1' between the words " forfeiture " and " for " in the eighth line thereof.
Hon. MARTIN BURRELL (Minister oi Customs):: The first amendment speaks
for itself. We have always had control of the importation of fire-arms from other countries by requiring the owners of such fire-arms to have licenses or permits from the Minister of Customs, but an exception applied to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. With a view to securing better control it has been thought desirable to withdraw this exception. The second amendment is a purely clerical one. By some mistake the section was allowed to stand for some years as drawn, and we are now making the necessary correction.


Frank S. Cahill: Have the Government in
mind the entire prohibition of the importation of small arms? .


Martin Burrell: I would not like
to speak positively as to that in .the absence of the Minister of Justice (Mr. Doherty), because his department has been dealing with the question under the Criminal Code. Perhaps my hon. friend would repeat his question when the Bill is up for second reading.
Resolution reported.
Hon: Mr. BURRELL moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 31 to amend the Customs Act.
Motion agreed -to and Bill read the first time.
On motion of Hon. Mr. Rowell the House adjourned at 9.35 p.m.
Tuesday, March 23, 1920.